Search (48 results, page 1 of 3)

  • × theme_ss:"Datenformate"
  • × theme_ss:"Formalerschließung"
  • × type_ss:"a"
  1. Aalberg, T.; Haugen, F.B.; Husby, O.: ¬A Tool for Converting from MARC to FRBR (2006) 0.15 
    0.15278558 = product of:
  0.20371412 = sum of:
    0.060314562 = weight(_text_:digital in 2425) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.060314562 = score(doc=2425,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.30507088 = fieldWeight in 2425, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2425)
    0.026799891 = weight(_text_:library in 2425) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026799891 = score(doc=2425,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.20335563 = fieldWeight in 2425, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2425)
    0.116599664 = sum of:
      0.069064304 = weight(_text_:project in 2425) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.069064304 = score(doc=2425,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.21156175 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050121464 = queryNorm
          0.32644984 = fieldWeight in 2425, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2425)
      0.047535364 = weight(_text_:22 in 2425) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.047535364 = score(doc=2425,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050121464 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2425, 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=2425)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)
    Abstract
    The FRBR model is by many considered to be an important contribution to the next generation of bibliographic catalogues, but a major challenge for the library community is how to use this model on already existing MARC-based bibliographic catalogues. This problem requires a solution for the interpretation and conversion of MARC records, and a tool for this kind of conversion is developed as a part of the Norwegian BIBSYS FRBR project. The tool is based on a systematic approach to the interpretation and conversion process and is designed to be adaptable to the rules applied in different catalogues.
    Source
    Research and advanced technology for digital libraries : 10th European conference, proceedings / ECDL 2006, Alicante, Spain, September 17 - 22, 2006
  2. Lee, S.; Jacob, E.K.: ¬An integrated approach to metadata interoperability : construction of a conceptual structure between MARC and FRBR (2011) 0.07 
    0.07128137 = product of:
  0.095041834 = sum of:
    0.051698197 = weight(_text_:digital in 302) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.051698197 = score(doc=302,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.26148933 = fieldWeight in 302, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=302)
    0.022971334 = weight(_text_:library in 302) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022971334 = score(doc=302,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.17430481 = fieldWeight in 302, 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=302)
    0.0203723 = product of:
      0.0407446 = sum of:
        0.0407446 = weight(_text_:22 in 302) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0407446 = score(doc=302,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 302, 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=302)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)
    Abstract
    Machine-Readable Cataloging (MARC) is currently the most broadly used bibliographic standard for encoding and exchanging bibliographic data. However, MARC may not fully support representation of the dynamic nature and semantics of digital resources because of its rigid and single-layered linear structure. The Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) model, which is designed to overcome the problems of MARC, does not provide sufficient data elements and adopts a predetermined hierarchy. A flexible structure for bibliographic data with detailed data elements is needed. Integrating MARC format with the hierarchical structure of FRBR is one approach to meet this need. The purpose of this research is to propose an approach that can facilitate interoperability between MARC and FRBR by providing a conceptual structure that can function as a mediator between MARC data elements and FRBR attributes.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Source
    Library resources and technical services. 55(2011) no.1, S.17-32
  3. Mönch, C.; Aalberg, T.: Automatic conversion from MARC to FRBR (2003) 0.06 
    0.059401147 = product of:
  0.07920153 = sum of:
    0.043081827 = weight(_text_:digital in 2422) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.043081827 = score(doc=2422,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.21790776 = fieldWeight in 2422, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2422)
    0.01914278 = weight(_text_:library in 2422) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01914278 = score(doc=2422,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.14525402 = fieldWeight in 2422, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2422)
    0.016976917 = product of:
      0.033953834 = sum of:
        0.033953834 = weight(_text_:22 in 2422) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033953834 = score(doc=2422,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2422, 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=2422)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)
    Abstract
    Catalogs have for centuries been the main tool that enabled users to search for items in a library by author, title, or subject. A catalog can be interpreted as a set of bibliographic records, where each record acts as a surrogate for a publication. Every record describes a specific publication and contains the data that is used to create the indexes of search systems and the information that is presented to the user. Bibliographic records are often captured and exchanged by the use of the MARC format. Although there are numerous rdquodialectsrdquo of the MARC format in use, they are usually crafted on the same basis and are interoperable with each other -to a certain extent. The data model of a MARC-based catalog, however, is rdquo[...] extremely non-normalized with excessive replication of datardquo [1]. For instance, a literary work that exists in numerous editions and translations is likely to yield a large result set because each edition or translation is represented by an individual record, that is unrelated to other records that describe the same work.
    Source
    Research and advanced technology for digital libraries : 7th European Conference, proceedings / ECDL 2003, Trondheim, Norway, August 17-22, 2003
  4. Coyle, K.: Future considerations : the functional library systems record (2004) 0.05 
    0.051093567 = product of:
  0.102187134 = sum of:
    0.07502407 = weight(_text_:library in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07502407 = score(doc=562,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.56927717 = fieldWeight in 562, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=562)
    0.027163066 = product of:
      0.054326132 = sum of:
        0.054326132 = weight(_text_:22 in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.054326132 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 562, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=562)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    The paper performs a thought experiment on the concept of a record based on the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records and library system functions, and concludes that if we want to develop a functional bibliographic record we need to do it within the context of a flexible, functional library systems record structure. The article suggests a new way to look at the library systems record that would allow libraries to move forward in terms of technology but also in terms of serving library users.
    Source
    Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2, S.166-174
  5. German, L.: Bibliographic utilities (2009) 0.05 
    0.049779683 = product of:
  0.09955937 = sum of:
    0.068930924 = weight(_text_:digital in 3858) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.068930924 = score(doc=3858,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.34865242 = fieldWeight in 3858, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3858)
    0.030628446 = weight(_text_:library in 3858) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030628446 = score(doc=3858,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.23240642 = fieldWeight in 3858, 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=3858)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Content
    Digital unter: http://dx.doi.org/10.1081/E-ELIS3-120044472. Vgl.: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/book/10.1081/E-ELIS3.
    Source
    Encyclopedia of library and information sciences. 3rd ed. Ed.: M.J. Bates
  6. Tennant, R.: ¬A bibliographic metadata infrastructure for the twenty-first century (2004) 0.04 
    0.040864773 = product of:
  0.081729546 = sum of:
    0.043315165 = weight(_text_:library in 2845) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.043315165 = score(doc=2845,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.32867232 = fieldWeight in 2845, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2845)
    0.038414378 = product of:
      0.076828755 = sum of:
        0.076828755 = weight(_text_:22 in 2845) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.076828755 = score(doc=2845,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.4377287 = fieldWeight in 2845, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2845)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    The current library bibliographic infrastructure was constructed in the early days of computers - before the Web, XML, and a variety of other technological advances that now offer new opportunities. General requirements of a modern metadata infrastructure for libraries are identified, including such qualities as versatility, extensibility, granularity, and openness. A new kind of metadata infrastructure is then proposed that exhibits at least some of those qualities. Some key challenges that must be overcome to implement a change of this magnitude are identified.
    Date
    9.12.2005 19:22:38
    Source
    Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2, S.175-181
  7. 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
  8. 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
  9. Yee, M.M.: New perspectives on the shared cataloging environment and a MARC 21 shopping list (2004) 0.03 
    0.028895756 = product of:
  0.057791512 = sum of:
    0.030628446 = weight(_text_:library in 132) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030628446 = score(doc=132,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.23240642 = fieldWeight in 132, 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=132)
    0.027163066 = product of:
      0.054326132 = sum of:
        0.054326132 = weight(_text_:22 in 132) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.054326132 = score(doc=132,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 132, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=132)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Source
    Library resources and technical services. 48(2004) no.3, S.165-178
  10. Oehlschläger, S.: Aus der 50. Sitzung der Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Verbundsysteme am 24. und 25. April 2006 in Köln (2006) 0.02 
    0.021778613 = product of:
  0.043557227 = sum of:
    0.030157281 = weight(_text_:digital in 5183) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030157281 = score(doc=5183,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.15253544 = fieldWeight in 5183, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=5183)
    0.013399946 = weight(_text_:library in 5183) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013399946 = score(doc=5183,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.10167781 = fieldWeight in 5183, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=5183)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Content
    - Neues von den Mitgliedern (in Auswahl, Stand: April 2006) - - Bibliotheksverbund Bayern (BVB) / Verbundzentrale - - - Erweiterung des ALEPH-Einsatzes - - - Catalogue Enrichment ADAM - - - CD-ROM-Server - - - InfoGuide - - - Application Service Providing (ASP) - - Bibliotheksservice-Zentrum Baden-Württemberg (BSZ) - - - SWB-Verbunddatenbank - - - Catalogue Enrichment - - - OPUS - - - Internetportal für Bibliotheken, Archive und Museen (BAM) - - - Metadatenverwaltung für den Verteilten Dokumentenserver (VDS) - - - Virtuelle Auskunft mit drei Partnerbibliotheken eröffnet - - Die Deutsche Bibliothek - - - DissOnline Portal - - - DissOnline Tutor - - - CrissCross Ziel des Projektes CrissCross ist es, ein multilinguales, thesaurusbasiertes und benutzergerechtes Recherchevokabular zu schaffen. Hierzu werden die Sachschlagwörter der Schlagwortnormdatei (SWD) mit den Notationen der Dewey-Dezimalklassifikation (DDC) verbunden. Die Multilingualität wird durch die Verknüpfung mit ihren Äquivalenten in den beiden umfassenden Schlagwortnormdateien Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH) und Rameau erreicht. Dabei wird auf den Ergebnissen des MACS-Projektes aufgebaut. Dem Nutzer wird so der Zugang zu heterogen erschlossenen Dokumenten ermöglicht, ohne dass er die Regeln des jeweiligen nationalen oder internationalen Erschließungsinstrumentes kennen muss. Projektpartner sind die Fakultät für Informations- und Kommunikationswissenschaften der Fachhochschule Köln und Die Deutsche Bibliothek. Das Projekt hat am 1. Februar 2006 begonnen und soll Ende Januar 2008 abgeschlossen sein. Technisch wird das Projekt im PICA/Iltis-System Der Deutschen Bibliothek und in der Arbeitsumgebung für die DDC "MelvilClass" realisiert. - - - DDC-vascoda
    - - Gemeinsamer Bibliotheksverbund (GBV) / Verbundzentrale des GBV (VZG) - - - WWW-Datenbanken - - - Virtuelle Fachbibliotheken - - - Verbundkatalog Internetquellen VKI - - - Öffentliche Bibliotheken im GBV - - Hessisches BibliotheksinformationsSystem (NeBIS) / Verbundzentrale - - - HeBIS-Portal - - - PND-Projekt - - - Catalogue Enrichment - - Hochschulbibliothekszentrum des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen (HBZ) - - - Bibliographischer Werkzeugkasten - - - DigiAuskunft - - - Suchmaschine - - - Suchmaschinentechnologie - - - Verfügbarkeitsrecherche - - - Publikationssysteme/Digital Peer Publishing (DiPP) - - Kooperativer Bibliotheksverbund Berlin-Brandenburg (KOBV) / KOBV-Zentrale - - - KOBV-Portal - - - Inbetriebnahme des neuen KOBV-Index - - - KOBV-Konsortialportal - - - OPUS- und Archivierungsdienste - - - Zeitschriftenartikel im Volltext
  11. Riva, P.: Mapping MARC 21 linking entry fields to FRBR and Tillett's taxonomy of bibliographic relationships (2004) 0.02 
    0.021671817 = product of:
  0.043343633 = sum of:
    0.022971334 = weight(_text_:library in 136) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022971334 = score(doc=136,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.17430481 = fieldWeight in 136, 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=136)
    0.0203723 = product of:
      0.0407446 = sum of:
        0.0407446 = weight(_text_:22 in 136) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0407446 = score(doc=136,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 136, 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=136)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Source
    Library resources and technical services. 48(2004) no.2, S.130-143
  12. Wisser, K.M.; O'Brien Roper, J.: Maximizing metadata : exploring the EAD-MARC relationship (2003) 0.02 
    0.01805985 = product of:
  0.0361197 = sum of:
    0.01914278 = weight(_text_:library in 154) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01914278 = score(doc=154,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.14525402 = fieldWeight in 154, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=154)
    0.016976917 = product of:
      0.033953834 = sum of:
        0.033953834 = weight(_text_:22 in 154) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033953834 = score(doc=154,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 154, 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=154)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Source
    Library resources and technical services. 47(2003) no.2, S.71-76
  13. Hegna, K.; Murtomaa, E.: Data mining MARC to find : FRBR (2002) 0.02 
    0.016243188 = product of:
  0.06497275 = sum of:
    0.06497275 = weight(_text_:library in 3845) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06497275 = score(doc=3845,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.4930085 = fieldWeight in 3845, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3845)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Imprint
    Oslo, Helsinki : University of Oslo Library, University of Helsinki Library
  14. Zapounidou, S.; Sfakakis, M.; Papatheodorou, C.: Library data integration : towards BIBFRAME mapping to EDM (2014) 0.01 
    0.014067013 = product of:
  0.05626805 = sum of:
    0.05626805 = weight(_text_:library in 1589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05626805 = score(doc=1589,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.42695788 = fieldWeight in 1589, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1589)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    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.
  15. Weber, R.: "Functional requirements for bibliographic records" und Regelwerksentwicklung (2001) 0.01 
    0.011883841 = product of:
  0.047535364 = sum of:
    0.047535364 = product of:
      0.09507073 = sum of:
        0.09507073 = weight(_text_:22 in 6838) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09507073 = score(doc=6838,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 6838, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6838)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    Dialog mit Bibliotheken. 13(2001) H.3, S.20-22
  16. Xu, A.; Hess, K.; Akerman, L.: From MARC to BIBFRAME 2.0 : Crosswalks (2018) 0.01 
    0.011722512 = product of:
  0.046890046 = sum of:
    0.046890046 = weight(_text_:library in 5172) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.046890046 = score(doc=5172,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.35579824 = fieldWeight in 5172, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5172)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    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.
  17. 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
  18. Tosaka, Y.; Park, J.-r.: RDA: Resource description & access : a survey of the current state of the art (2013) 0.01 
    0.010770457 = product of:
  0.043081827 = sum of:
    0.043081827 = weight(_text_:digital in 677) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.043081827 = score(doc=677,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.21790776 = fieldWeight in 677, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=677)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    Resource Description & Access (RDA) is intended to provide a flexible and extensible framework that can accommodate all types of content and media within rapidly evolving digital environments while also maintaining compatibility with the Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules, 2nd edition (AACR2). The cataloging community is grappling with practical issues in navigating the transition from AACR2 to RDA; there is a definite need to evaluate major subject areas and broader themes in information organization under the new RDA paradigm. This article aims to accomplish this task through a thorough and critical review of the emerging RDA literature published from 2005 to 2011. The review mostly concerns key areas of difference between RDA and AACR2, the relationship of the new cataloging code to metadata standards, the impact on encoding standards such as Machine-Readable Cataloging (MARC), end user considerations, and practitioners' views on RDA implementation and training. Future research will require more in-depth studies of RDA's expected benefits and the manner in which the new cataloging code will improve resource retrieval and bibliographic control for users and catalogers alike over AACR2. The question as to how the cataloging community can best move forward to the post-AACR2/MARC environment must be addressed carefully so as to chart the future of bibliographic control in the evolving environment of information production, management, and use.
  19. Kushwoh, S.S.; Gautam, J.N.; Singh, R.: Migration from CDS / ISIS to KOHA : a case study of data conversion from CCF to MARC 21 (2009) 0.01 
    0.009946881 = product of:
  0.039787523 = sum of:
    0.039787523 = weight(_text_:library in 2279) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.039787523 = score(doc=2279,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.30190483 = fieldWeight in 2279, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2279)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    Standards are important for quality and interoperability in any system. Bibliographic record creation standards such as MARC 21 (Machine Readable Catalogue), CCF (Common Communication Format), UNIMARC (Universal MARC) and their local variations, are in practice all across the library community. ILMS (Integrated Library Management Systems) are using these standards for the design of databases and the creation of bibliographic records. Their use is important for uniformity of the system and bibliographic data, but there are problems when a library wants to switch over from one system to another using different standards. This paper discusses migration from one record standard to another, mapping of data and related issues. Data exported from CDS/ISIS CCF based records to KOHA MARC 21 based records are discussed as a case study. This methodology, with few modifications, can be applied for migration of data in other bibliographicformats too. Freeware tools can be utilized for migration.
  20. 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

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 28
  • d 18
  • sp 1
  • More… Less…

Themes