Search (3 results, page 1 of 1)

0.021810908 = product of:
  0.0817909 = sum of:
    0.010645939 = weight(_text_:und in 3732) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010645939 = score(doc=3732,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.07245795 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032692216 = queryNorm
        0.14692576 = fieldWeight in 3732, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3732)
    0.035589006 = weight(_text_:zur in 3732) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.035589006 = score(doc=3732,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.100663416 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.079125 = idf(docFreq=5528, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032692216 = queryNorm
        0.3535446 = fieldWeight in 3732, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.079125 = idf(docFreq=5528, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3732)
    0.00694547 = weight(_text_:in in 3732) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.00694547 = score(doc=3732,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.044469737 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032692216 = queryNorm
        0.1561842 = fieldWeight in 3732, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3732)
    0.028610492 = weight(_text_:der in 3732) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028610492 = score(doc=3732,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.073026784 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032692216 = queryNorm
        0.3917808 = fieldWeight in 3732, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          2.2337668 = idf(docFreq=12875, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3732)
  0.26666668 = coord(4/15)

Abstract

Seit einiger Zeit stellen Bibliotheken ihre bibliografischen Metadadaten verstärkt offen in Form von Linked Data zur Verfügung. Dabei kommen jedoch ganz unterschiedliche Modelle für die Strukturierung der bibliografischen Daten zur Anwendung. Manche Bibliotheken verwenden ein auf FRBR basierendes Modell mit mehreren Schichten von Entitäten, während andere flache, am Datensatz orientierte Modelle nutzen. Der Wildwuchs bei den Datenmodellen erschwert die Nachnutzung der bibliografischen Daten. Im Ergebnis haben die Bibliotheken die früheren MARC-Silos nur mit zueinander inkompatiblen Linked-Data-Silos vertauscht. Deshalb ist es häufig schwierig, Datensets miteinander zu kombinieren und nachzunutzen. Kleinere Unterschiede in der Datenmodellierung lassen sich zwar durch Schema Mappings in den Griff bekommen, doch erscheint es fraglich, ob die Interoperabilität insgesamt zugenommen hat. Der Beitrag stellt die Ergebnisse einer Studie zu verschiedenen veröffentlichten Sets von bibliografischen Daten vor. Dabei werden auch die unterschiedlichen Modelle betrachtet, um bibliografische Daten als RDF darzustellen, sowie Werkzeuge zur Erzeugung von entsprechenden Daten aus dem MARC-Format. Abschließend wird der von der Finnischen Nationalbibliothek verfolgte Ansatz behandelt.

0.020741977 = product of:
  0.07778241 = sum of:
    0.023199033 = weight(_text_:23 in 677) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023199033 = score(doc=677,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.117170855 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032692216 = queryNorm
        0.1979932 = fieldWeight in 677, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=677)
    0.023199033 = weight(_text_:23 in 677) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023199033 = score(doc=677,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.117170855 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032692216 = queryNorm
        0.1979932 = fieldWeight in 677, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=677)
    0.023199033 = weight(_text_:23 in 677) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023199033 = score(doc=677,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.117170855 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032692216 = queryNorm
        0.1979932 = fieldWeight in 677, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5840597 = idf(docFreq=3336, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=677)
    0.008185315 = weight(_text_:in in 677) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008185315 = score(doc=677,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.044469737 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032692216 = queryNorm
        0.18406484 = fieldWeight in 677, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=677)
  0.26666668 = coord(4/15)

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.

Date

23. 3.2013 12:26:02

Series

Advances in information science

5.346625E-4 = product of:
  0.008019937 = sum of:
    0.008019937 = weight(_text_:in in 1589) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008019937 = score(doc=1589,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.044469737 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.032692216 = queryNorm
        0.18034597 = fieldWeight in 1589, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1589)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

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