-
UNIMARC and CDS/ISIS : Proceedings of the Workshops held in Budapest, 21.-22. June 1993 and Barcelona, 26. August 1993 (1994)
0.06
0.059659608 = product of:
0.13423412 = sum of:
0.01960283 = weight(_text_:of in 8779) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01960283 = score(doc=8779,freq=14.0), product of:
0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.31997898 = fieldWeight in 8779, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=8779)
0.028615767 = weight(_text_:systems in 8779) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028615767 = score(doc=8779,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.23767869 = fieldWeight in 8779, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=8779)
0.06743785 = weight(_text_:software in 8779) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06743785 = score(doc=8779,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15541996 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.43390724 = fieldWeight in 8779, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=8779)
0.018577661 = product of:
0.037155323 = sum of:
0.037155323 = weight(_text_:22 in 8779) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.037155323 = score(doc=8779,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13719016 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 8779, 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=8779)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.44444445 = coord(4/9)
- Content
- Enthält die Beiträge: CAMPOS, F.: UNIMARC: state of the art on the universal format for international exchange; HOLT, B.: The maintenance of UNIMARC; WILLER, M.: UNIMARC / Authorities format; HOPKINSON, A.: CDS/ISIS as a tool for implementing UNIMARC; BERKE, S. u. M. SIPOS: The comprehensive information system of the National Széchényi Library and the Hungarian MARC format; SHRAIBERG, Y.: Application of the CDS/ISIS software package and UNIMARC format in the automated systems of the Russian National Public Library for Science and Technology and other libraries of the Russian Federation; STOKLASOVA, B.: Exchange formats in the Czech Republic: past, present and future
- Theme
- Bibliographische Software
-
Noordermeer, T.: UseMARCON, a user controlled generic MARC converter (1998)
0.04
0.038067438 = product of:
0.114202306 = sum of:
0.018148692 = weight(_text_:of in 5174) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018148692 = score(doc=5174,freq=12.0), product of:
0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.29624295 = fieldWeight in 5174, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5174)
0.028615767 = weight(_text_:systems in 5174) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028615767 = score(doc=5174,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.23767869 = fieldWeight in 5174, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5174)
0.06743785 = weight(_text_:software in 5174) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06743785 = score(doc=5174,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15541996 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.43390724 = fieldWeight in 5174, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5174)
0.33333334 = coord(3/9)
- Abstract
- With 50 different MARC formats in use globally and 10 employed in European Union national libraries problems are created in the international supply of cataloguing data and the quality of records. UseMARCON is a cooperative project of Dutch, Portuguese, UK and German national libraries using software from Jouve Systems d'Information in France to produce a generic conversion program capable of translating bibliographic records in any ISO2709 format into any other ISO2709 format using UNIMARC as a switching format. Outlines what is required in the process of conversion; describes the functionality of the software; and lists the MARC formats with which UseMARCON can operate. The project was finished in 1997
-
Reinke, U.: ¬Der Austausch terminologischer Daten (1993)
0.03
0.03471233 = product of:
0.10413699 = sum of:
0.016935252 = weight(_text_:of in 4608) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016935252 = score(doc=4608,freq=8.0), product of:
0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.27643585 = fieldWeight in 4608, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4608)
0.03270373 = weight(_text_:systems in 4608) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03270373 = score(doc=4608,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.2716328 = fieldWeight in 4608, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4608)
0.054498006 = weight(_text_:software in 4608) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.054498006 = score(doc=4608,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15541996 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.35064998 = fieldWeight in 4608, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4608)
0.33333334 = coord(3/9)
- Abstract
- Diplomarbeit at the University of Saarbrücken which contains the following topics: data exchange format; terminology management systems; terminological databases; terminological record; data elements; data categories; data fields, etc.: hard- and software-related difficulties for the structure of records; description of approaches for the development of an exchange format for terminological data (MATER, MicroMATER, NTRF, SGML); considerations concerning an SGML-like exchange format; perspectives
-
Nichols introduces MARCit (1998)
0.02
0.022157678 = product of:
0.099709556 = sum of:
0.017962547 = weight(_text_:of in 1438) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017962547 = score(doc=1438,freq=4.0), product of:
0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.2932045 = fieldWeight in 1438, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1438)
0.08174701 = weight(_text_:software in 1438) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08174701 = score(doc=1438,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15541996 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.525975 = fieldWeight in 1438, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1438)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- Abstract
- Reports the release of MARCit, a software package that enables the cataloguing of Internet resources into MARC format bibliographic records
-
Paulus, W.; Weishaupt, K.: Bibliotheksdaten werden mehr wert : LibLink wertet bibliothekarische Dienstleistung auf (1996)
0.02
0.021036007 = product of:
0.094662026 = sum of:
0.068122506 = weight(_text_:software in 5228) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.068122506 = score(doc=5228,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15541996 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.43831247 = fieldWeight in 5228, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5228)
0.026539518 = product of:
0.053079035 = sum of:
0.053079035 = weight(_text_:22 in 5228) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.053079035 = score(doc=5228,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13719016 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 5228, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5228)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- Abstract
- Die maschinenlesbaren Katalogdaten der Bibliotheken wurden bisher hauptsächlich intern genutzt. Die im Institut Arbeit und Technik entwickelte Software LibLink ermöglich es, diese Daten auch im wissenschaftlichen Kontext zu verwenden
- Date
- 29. 9.1996 18:58:22
-
Markup and metadata (1998)
0.02
0.019893078 = product of:
0.08951885 = sum of:
0.06711562 = weight(_text_:applications in 1835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06711562 = score(doc=1835,freq=2.0), product of:
0.17247584 = queryWeight, product of:
4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.38913056 = fieldWeight in 1835, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1835)
0.022403233 = weight(_text_:of in 1835) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022403233 = score(doc=1835,freq=14.0), product of:
0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.36569026 = fieldWeight in 1835, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1835)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- Abstract
- Discusses the range of applications of the XML meta language, which allows users to design their own markup language and share it with others. Instead of being confined to HTML, where 'one size fits all', industries, academic disciplines and professional organizations can use XML syntax to create a common set of tags which standardize the presentation of information. The linking abilities of XML are more powerful than HTML, so that it will support bidirectional and multiway links, as well as those to a span of text rather than to a single point
-
Recommandation 995 (1995)
0.02
0.01671986 = product of:
0.07523937 = sum of:
0.020741362 = weight(_text_:of in 4689) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020741362 = score(doc=4689,freq=12.0), product of:
0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.33856338 = fieldWeight in 4689, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4689)
0.054498006 = weight(_text_:software in 4689) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.054498006 = score(doc=4689,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15541996 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.35064998 = fieldWeight in 4689, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4689)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- Abstract
- Text of a document produced by the French Librarians Association, Federation of Library Software Users and the Association of Directors of Departmental Lending Libraries, setting out standards for local data included in bibliographic notices in UNIMARC format. These are specifically intended for loan copies sent from central to branch libraries, for integration into the local catalogue. The subfields (MARC field 995) are: origin of document; bar code; classification code and loan details; details of contents, support etc; and notes on physical features
-
Fattahi, R.: ¬A uniform approach to the indexing of cataloguing data in online library systems (1997)
0.02
0.01579003 = product of:
0.07105514 = sum of:
0.021999538 = weight(_text_:of in 131) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021999538 = score(doc=131,freq=24.0), product of:
0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.3591007 = fieldWeight in 131, product of:
4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
24.0 = termFreq=24.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=131)
0.0490556 = weight(_text_:systems in 131) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0490556 = score(doc=131,freq=8.0), product of:
0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.4074492 = fieldWeight in 131, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=131)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- 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
-
Guenther, R.S.: Automating the Library of Congress Classification Scheme : implementation of the USMARC format for classification data (1996)
0.02
0.015253791 = product of:
0.06864206 = sum of:
0.020956306 = weight(_text_:of in 5578) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020956306 = score(doc=5578,freq=16.0), product of:
0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.34207192 = fieldWeight in 5578, product of:
4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
16.0 = termFreq=16.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5578)
0.047685754 = weight(_text_:software in 5578) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.047685754 = score(doc=5578,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15541996 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.30681872 = fieldWeight in 5578, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5578)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- Abstract
- Potential uses for classification data in machine readable form and reasons for the development of a standard, the USMARC Format for Classification Data, which allows for classification data to interact with other USMARC bibliographic and authority data are discussed. The development, structure, content, and use of the standard is reviewed with implementation decisions for the Library of Congress Classification scheme noted. The author examines the implementation of USMARC classification at LC, the conversion of the schedules, and the functionality of the software being used. Problems in the effort are explored, and enhancements desired for the online classification system are considered.
-
USMARC format for classification data : including guidelines for content designation (1991)
0.02
0.015047257 = product of:
0.06771266 = sum of:
0.018148692 = weight(_text_:of in 4372) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018148692 = score(doc=4372,freq=12.0), product of:
0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.29624295 = fieldWeight in 4372, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4372)
0.049563963 = weight(_text_:systems in 4372) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049563963 = score(doc=4372,freq=6.0), product of:
0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.41167158 = fieldWeight in 4372, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4372)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- Abstract
- Format specifications for the communication of MARC classification records, which may be used in online public catalog retrieval systems, in systems to maintain and develop classification schedules, and in online systems for library classifiers. Defines the codes and conventions (tags, indicators, subfield codes, and codes values) that identify the data elements in the records. Developed to support the 2 major US classification schemes: Library of Congress Classification and Dewey Decimal Classification, but also lets you communicate other classification schemes. Includes a glossary of classification terms and full record examples of LCC, DDC, NLM classification and UDC
- Editor
- Library of Congress
- Imprint
- Washington : Library of Congress
-
Cantrall, D.: From MARC to Mosaic : progressing toward data interchangeability at the Oregon State Archives (1994)
0.01
0.014953019 = product of:
0.067288585 = sum of:
0.01960283 = weight(_text_:of in 8470) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01960283 = score(doc=8470,freq=14.0), product of:
0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.31997898 = fieldWeight in 8470, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=8470)
0.047685754 = weight(_text_:software in 8470) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.047685754 = score(doc=8470,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15541996 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.30681872 = fieldWeight in 8470, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=8470)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- Abstract
- Explains the technology used by the Oregon State Archives to relaize the goal of data interchangeability given the prescribed nature of the MARC format. Describes an emergent model of learning and information delivery focusing on the example of World Wide Web, accessed most often by the software client Mosaic, which is the fastest growing segment of the Internet information highway. Also describes The Data Magician, a flexible program which allows for many combinations of input and output formats, and will read unconventional formats such as MARC communications format. Oregon State Archives, using Mosaic and The Data Magician, are consequently able to present valuable electronic information to a variety of users
-
Kokabi, M.: ¬The internationalization of MARC : Pt.4: UNIMARC, some formats based on it and some other MARC formats (1996)
0.01
0.014453835 = product of:
0.06504226 = sum of:
0.024573447 = weight(_text_:of in 7191) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024573447 = score(doc=7191,freq=22.0), product of:
0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.40111488 = fieldWeight in 7191, product of:
4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
22.0 = termFreq=22.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7191)
0.04046881 = weight(_text_:systems in 7191) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04046881 = score(doc=7191,freq=4.0), product of:
0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.33612844 = fieldWeight in 7191, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7191)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- Abstract
- Discusses some of the problems associated with the requirements and prospects for international standards for the exchange of bibliographic records in machine readable form, the various roles of national bibliographies and national libraries; the lack of international cataloguing standards and of an international subject control systems; language difficulties; character sets and codes, and non roman alphabets. Explains how these problems lie behind the development of various MARC formats out of UNIMARC. In this final part of a 4 part article describes the formats for South Africa, Taiwan, Japan, Croatia and Germany and indicates the points of difference and the influence of local requirements
- Source
- OCLC systems and services. 12(1996) no.4, S.20-37
-
Riemer, J.J.: Adding 856 Fields to authority records : rationale and implications (1998)
0.01
0.0138898 = product of:
0.0625041 = sum of:
0.014818345 = weight(_text_:of in 3715) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014818345 = score(doc=3715,freq=8.0), product of:
0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.24188137 = fieldWeight in 3715, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3715)
0.047685754 = weight(_text_:software in 3715) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.047685754 = score(doc=3715,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15541996 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.30681872 = fieldWeight in 3715, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3715)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- Abstract
- Discusses ways of applying MARC Field 856 (Electronic Location and Access) to authority records in online union catalogues. In principle, each catalogue site location can be treated as the electronic record of the work concerned and the MARC Field 856 can then refer to this location as if it were referring to the location of a primary record. Although URLs may become outdated, the fact that they are located in specifically defined MARC Fields makes the data contained amenable to the same link maintenance software ae used for the electronic records themselves. Includes practical examples of typical union catalogue records incorporating MARC Field 856
-
Kokabi, M.: ¬The internationalization of MARC : Pt.3: some MARC formats based on UKMARC (1996)
0.01
0.013788608 = product of:
0.062048733 = sum of:
0.021169065 = weight(_text_:of in 6725) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021169065 = score(doc=6725,freq=8.0), product of:
0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.34554482 = fieldWeight in 6725, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=6725)
0.040879667 = weight(_text_:systems in 6725) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.040879667 = score(doc=6725,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.339541 = fieldWeight in 6725, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=6725)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- Abstract
- Surveys the development of various MARC formats out of UKMARC. Describes the formats for Australia, Thailand, Italy and Singapore, indicating their main points of difference and local requirements
- Source
- OCLC systems and services. 12(1996) no.3, S.8-11
-
Bourne, R.: Common MARC, or 'vivent les differences'? (1996)
0.01
0.013788608 = product of:
0.062048733 = sum of:
0.021169065 = weight(_text_:of in 6727) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021169065 = score(doc=6727,freq=8.0), product of:
0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.34554482 = fieldWeight in 6727, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=6727)
0.040879667 = weight(_text_:systems in 6727) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.040879667 = score(doc=6727,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.339541 = fieldWeight in 6727, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=6727)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- Abstract
- Investigates the history of the machine readable catalogue and the role of the MARC format. Compares US and UK attitiudes to MARC and raises the issue of the incompatibility of the US and British standards. Suggests that they should be able to integrate, giving reasons for this
- Source
- OCLC systems and services. 12(1996) no.2, S.35-39
-
Kokabi, M.: ¬The internationalization of MARC : Pt.2: some MARC formats based on USMARC (1996)
0.01
0.01315836 = product of:
0.059212618 = sum of:
0.018332949 = weight(_text_:of in 6723) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018332949 = score(doc=6723,freq=6.0), product of:
0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.2992506 = fieldWeight in 6723, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=6723)
0.040879667 = weight(_text_:systems in 6723) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.040879667 = score(doc=6723,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.339541 = fieldWeight in 6723, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=6723)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- Abstract
- Surveys the development of various MARC formats out of USMARC. Considers the formats for Canada, France, Spain and Indonesia, Indicating their main differences and local requirements
- Source
- OCLC systems and services. 12(1996) no.2, S.21-26
-
Chowdhury, G.G.: Record formats for integrated databases : a review and comparison (1996)
0.01
0.013026112 = product of:
0.058617502 = sum of:
0.018148692 = weight(_text_:of in 7679) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018148692 = score(doc=7679,freq=12.0), product of:
0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.29624295 = fieldWeight in 7679, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7679)
0.04046881 = weight(_text_:systems in 7679) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04046881 = score(doc=7679,freq=4.0), product of:
0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.33612844 = fieldWeight in 7679, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7679)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- Abstract
- Discusses the issues involved in the development of data formats for computerized information retrieval systems. Integrated databases capable of holding both bibliographic and factual information, in a single database structure, are more convenient for searching and retrieval by end users. Several bibliographic formats have been developed and are used for these bibliographic control puposes. Reviews features of 6 major bibliographic formats: USMARC, UKMARC, UNIMARC, CCF, MIBIS and ABNCD are reviewed. Only 2 formats: CCF and ABNCD are capable of holding both bibliographic and factual information and supporting the design of integrated databases. The comparison suggests that, while CCF makes more detailed provision for bibliographic information, ABNCD makes better provision for factual information such as profiles of institutions, information systems, projects and human experts
-
Bourdon, F.: Qu'est-ce qu'un format d'autorité? (1997)
0.01
0.012925313 = product of:
0.058163907 = sum of:
0.010478153 = weight(_text_:of in 902) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.010478153 = score(doc=902,freq=4.0), product of:
0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.17103596 = fieldWeight in 902, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=902)
0.047685754 = weight(_text_:software in 902) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.047685754 = score(doc=902,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15541996 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.30681872 = fieldWeight in 902, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=902)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- 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
-
Wall, C.E.; Cole, T.W.; Kazmer, M.M.: HyperText MARCup : a conceptualization for encoding, de-constructing, searching, retrieving, and using traditional knowledge tools (1995)
0.01
0.012674716 = product of:
0.05703622 = sum of:
0.016567415 = weight(_text_:of in 4186) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016567415 = score(doc=4186,freq=10.0), product of:
0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.2704316 = fieldWeight in 4186, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4186)
0.04046881 = weight(_text_:systems in 4186) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04046881 = score(doc=4186,freq=4.0), product of:
0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.33612844 = fieldWeight in 4186, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4186)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- 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
-
Kokabi, M.: ¬The internationalization of MARC : Pt.1: the emergence and divergence of MARC (1996)
0.01
0.012589732 = product of:
0.056653794 = sum of:
0.023950063 = weight(_text_:of in 6726) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023950063 = score(doc=6726,freq=16.0), product of:
0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.39093933 = fieldWeight in 6726, product of:
4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
16.0 = termFreq=16.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6726)
0.03270373 = weight(_text_:systems in 6726) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03270373 = score(doc=6726,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.03917671 = queryNorm
0.2716328 = fieldWeight in 6726, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6726)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- Abstract
- Surveys the evolution and development of MARC formats for the digital encoding of bibliographic data from their beginnings in 1968 at the Library of Congress to the present time, with particular emphasis on the development of 17 national formats. Examines the reasons for the divergence of MARC formats from each other as well as the early and recent trends in the development of national MARC formats
- Source
- OCLC systems and services. 12(1996) no.1, S.21-31
