Search (270 results, page 14 of 14)

0.0011898974 = product of:
  0.0071393843 = sum of:
    0.0071393843 = weight(_text_:in in 3858) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0071393843 = score(doc=3858,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.120230645 = fieldWeight in 3858, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3858)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

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.

0.0010411602 = product of:
  0.006246961 = sum of:
    0.006246961 = weight(_text_:in in 4186) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006246961 = score(doc=4186,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.10520181 = fieldWeight in 4186, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4186)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Pierian Press and the University of Illinois have been experimenting with directly parsing classified, analytical bibliographies into an electronic structure using the respective strengths of both HTML and MARC. This structure, which is explained and illustrated in this article, mitigates the weaknesses of each standard by drawing on the strengths of the other. The resulting electronic knowledge constructs can be mounted on local library systems and function as dynamic maps onto a specified subset of resources on those systems. Linkages can be added and/or removed to customize each construct to local holdings and/or needs

0.0010411602 = product of:
  0.006246961 = sum of:
    0.006246961 = weight(_text_:in in 660) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006246961 = score(doc=660,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.10520181 = fieldWeight in 660, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=660)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

The UNIMARC format has become more widely used as a method of facilitating the international exchange of bibliographic data; due, in part, to a namber of projects funded by the European Union. Reviews the state of these projects as a report to a workshop on the UNIMARC format, Luxembourg, Sep 96. Projects described briefly include: UseMARCON; CoBRA UNIMARC; CoBRA AUTHOR; ONE; CHASE; DELICAT; and BIBLINK. Describes other initiatives related to to UNIMARC by IFLA and OCLC. Presents the main conclusions arising from the workshop addressing the areas of formats, authority control, character sets and electronic publications

0.0010411602 = product of:
  0.006246961 = sum of:
    0.006246961 = weight(_text_:in in 892) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006246961 = score(doc=892,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.10520181 = fieldWeight in 892, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=892)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Secondary information, e.g. MARC based bibliographic records, comprises structured data for identifying, tagging, retrieving and management of primary documents. SGML, the standard format for coding content and structure of primary documents, was introduced in 1986 as a publishing tool but is now being applied to bibliographic records. SGML now comprises standard definitions (DTD) for books, serials, articles and mathematical formulae. A simplified version (HTML) is used for Web pages. Pilot projects to develop SGML as a standard for bibliographic exchange include the Dublin Core, listing 13 descriptive elements for Internet documents; the French GRISELI programme using SGML for exchanging grey literature and US experiments on reformatting USMARC for use with SGML-based records

0.0010411602 = product of:
  0.006246961 = sum of:
    0.006246961 = weight(_text_:in in 902) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006246961 = score(doc=902,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.10520181 = fieldWeight in 902, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=902)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Authority records complement bibliographic records, providing cataloguers with essential subject heading and related information. At present there is no international format standard comparable to ISBD for bibliographic records, though IFLA and the International Archives Council have set up working groups. The essential data form comprises of subject heading, structure, homonyms, with supplementary supporting information. In France MARC formats are most widely used, e.g. UNIMARC(A) for authority records and (B) for bibliographic. The National Library (BNF) is introducing new cataloguing software based on the reorganisation of its authotity files, using integrated INTERMARC. As an experiments, readers will for the first time have access to authority files, thus enriching, completing and clarifying the bibliographic records

0.0010411602 = product of:
  0.006246961 = sum of:
    0.006246961 = weight(_text_:in in 915) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006246961 = score(doc=915,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.10520181 = fieldWeight in 915, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=915)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

The French National Library (NBF) has developed 2 new versions of INTERMARC, (A) and (B), to standardise cataloguing procedures and enrich bibliographic description and access. The bibliographic description format (B) accords with existing ISBD and can be used for all types of documents, allowing inclusion of specific characteristics and addition of new links. The format for editing records (A) eliminates redundancies and enriches links between fields. Both will be used as reference formats in the new Information System

0.0010411602 = product of:
  0.006246961 = sum of:
    0.006246961 = weight(_text_:in in 5423) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006246961 = score(doc=5423,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.10520181 = fieldWeight in 5423, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5423)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

This article explores recent discussions about appropriate mark-up conventions for library information intended for use on the World Wide Web. In particular, the question of whether the MARC 21 format will continue to be useful and whether the time is right for a full-fledged conversion effort to XML is explored. The author concludes that the MARC format will be relevant well into the future, and its use will not hamper access to bibliographic information via the web. Early XML exploratory efforts carried out at the Stanford University's Lane Medical Library are reported on. Although these efforts are a promising start, much more consultation and investigation is needed to arrive at broadly acceptable standards for XML library information encoding and retrieval.

0.0010411602 = product of:
  0.006246961 = sum of:
    0.006246961 = weight(_text_:in in 5579) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006246961 = score(doc=5579,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.10520181 = fieldWeight in 5579, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5579)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

Evaluates current research into bibliographic relationships sparked off by B.B. Tillett's taxonomy of bibliographic relationships (LRTS 35(1991) no.4, S.393-405) and R.P. Smiraglia's taxonomy of the derivative bibliographic relationship (PhD dissertation, Chicago Univ., Graduate Library School, 1992). These researches provide the context for a discussion of recent research and standards work. Reevaluates research on the sequential relationship drawn from work conducted on periodicals and the implications of that research is applied to cataloguing system design. Evaluates the conceptual designs proposed by researchers such as G.H. Leazer and M. Gorman's and uses them in a critique of the USMARC format for bibliographic description

8.9242304E-4 = product of:
  0.005354538 = sum of:
    0.005354538 = weight(_text_:in in 4350) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.005354538 = score(doc=4350,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.09017298 = fieldWeight in 4350, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4350)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Abstract

The MARC standard for representing catalogue records and the Z39.50 standard for locating and retrieving them have facilitated interoperability in the library domain for more than a decade. With the increasing ubiquity of XML, these standards are being superseded by MARCXML and MarcXchange for record representation and SRW/U for searching and retrieval. Service providers moving from the older standards to the newer generally need to support both old and new forms during the transition period. YAZ Proxy uses a novel approach to provide SRW/MARCXML access to the Library of Congress catalogue, by translating requests into Z39.50 and querying the older system directly. As a fringe benefit, it also greatly accelerates Z39.50 access.

8.9242304E-4 = product of:
  0.005354538 = sum of:
    0.005354538 = weight(_text_:in in 5173) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.005354538 = score(doc=5173,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.059380736 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043654136 = queryNorm
        0.09017298 = fieldWeight in 5173, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5173)
  0.16666667 = coord(1/6)

Footnote

Beitrag in einem Heft: 'Setting standards to work and live by: A memorial Festschrift for Valerie Bross'.