Search (40 results, page 2 of 2)

  • × theme_ss:"Formalerschließung"
  • × theme_ss:"Geschichte der Kataloge"
  • × type_ss:"a"
  1. Thomas, S.E.: ¬The Program for Cooperative Cataloging : backstory and future potential (2020) 0.00
    0.0020506454 = product of:
      0.004101291 = sum of:
        0.004101291 = product of:
          0.008202582 = sum of:
            0.008202582 = weight(_text_:a in 124) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.008202582 = score(doc=124,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.1544581 = fieldWeight in 124, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=124)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    In 1988 the Library of Congress and eight library participants undertook a two-year pilot known as the National Coordinated Cataloging Program (NCCP) to increase the number of quality bibliographic records. Subsequently the Bibliographic Services Study Committee reviewed the pilot. Discussions held at the Library of Congress (LC) and in other fora resulted in the creation of the Cooperative Cataloging Council, and, ultimately, the establishment of the Program for Cooperative Cataloging (PCC) in 1994. The conditions that contributed to a successful approach to shared cataloging are described. The article concludes with considerations for expanding the future effectiveness of the PCC.
    Type
    a
  2. Soper, M.E.: Nineteen Thirty-Eight to today : problems in cataloging then and now (1987) 0.00
    0.001913537 = product of:
      0.003827074 = sum of:
        0.003827074 = product of:
          0.007654148 = sum of:
            0.007654148 = weight(_text_:a in 397) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.007654148 = score(doc=397,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.14413087 = fieldWeight in 397, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=397)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    In 1938 the Catalog Section of the American Library Association (ALA) mailed a questionnaire to approximately 1600 librarians, asking their opinions concerning various problems in cataloging and classification. Many changes have occurred since then, but there are problems cited in 1938 that are still with us in one form or another. The items listed in the questionnaire are discussed, and conclusions drawn as to their pertinence for today.
    Type
    a
  3. Russell, B.M.: Hidden wisdom and unseen treasure : revisiting cataloging in Medieval libraries (1998) 0.00
    0.001757696 = product of:
      0.003515392 = sum of:
        0.003515392 = product of:
          0.007030784 = sum of:
            0.007030784 = weight(_text_:a in 4627) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.007030784 = score(doc=4627,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.13239266 = fieldWeight in 4627, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4627)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Scholars working in the field of mediaeval history and cultural history have recognized that understanding the cataloguing and accessioning of books is central to understanding the transmission of ideas. Unfortunately, general histories of libraries and even the library literature seem content to sketch out a chronological development of cataloguing in line with the 19th and 20th century view of library development, from a simple list to complex intellectual systems. In truth, however, those individuals responsible for cataloguing books in mediaeval libraries faced many of the same challenges as cataloguers today: how to organize information; how to serve local needs; and how to provide access to individual works within larger bibliographic formats. Summarizes recent scholarship in the history of the book that relates to library cataloguing, as well as providing parallels to the cooperative library environment of today
    Type
    a
  4. Walravens, H.: Serials cataloging in Germany : the historical development (2003) 0.00
    0.001757696 = product of:
      0.003515392 = sum of:
        0.003515392 = product of:
          0.007030784 = sum of:
            0.007030784 = weight(_text_:a in 5650) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.007030784 = score(doc=5650,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.13239266 = fieldWeight in 5650, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5650)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    This paper outlines the development of serials cataloguing in Germany, which started with entries usually in systematic catalogues. Cataloguing codes were developed first by individual major libraries; the establishment of a Prussian union catalogue called for generally recognized rules, but these focused mainly on sorting and filing. When, in the 1960s, the Prussian Instructions were given up in favor of RAK (Regeln für Alphabetische Katalogisierung), ISBD was adopted for the descriptive part. As to modern international cooperation, this paper explains that the main obstacles are not so much different cataloguing codes but the lack of consensus on the definition of a serial title. Recent revision efforts missed the opportunity of accepting an International Standard Serials Title.
    Type
    a
  5. Kasprzik, A.: Vorläufer der Internationalen Katalogisierungsprinzipien (2014) 0.00
    0.001757696 = product of:
      0.003515392 = sum of:
        0.003515392 = product of:
          0.007030784 = sum of:
            0.007030784 = weight(_text_:a in 1619) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.007030784 = score(doc=1619,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.13239266 = fieldWeight in 1619, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1619)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Für eine korrekte und zielführende Formalerschließung lassen sich drei Ebenen von Leitlinien definieren: Zielsetzungen, Prinzipien und Regeln der Katalogisierung. Der vorliegende Artikel befasst sich hauptsächlich mit den (möglichen) Zielsetzungen und Prinzipien der Katalogisierung. In der Einleitung der im Jahr 2009 herausgegebenen "Erklärung zu den Internationalen Katalogisierungsprinzipien" (ICP) ist vermerkt, dass die dort vorgelegte Prinzipiensammlung aufbaut auf "den großen Katalogtraditionen der Welt". Diese Traditionen werden dann mit drei Referenzen aus der frühen Fachliteratur belegt: Den Schriften von Charles A. Cutter (1904), Shiyali R. Ranganathan (1955) und Seymour Lubetzky (1969). In diesem Artikel werden nach einem kurzen chronologischen Überblick die drei genannten Publikationen und insbesondere die darin enthaltenen Feststellungen zu Sinn und Zweck von international einheitlichen Prinzipien für die bibliothekarische Formalerschließung in ihren geschichtlichen Kontext eingeordnet und ihr jeweiliger Einfluss auf die diversen existierenden Formulierungen von Zielen und Prinzipien näher beleuchtet. Außerdem werden einige bemerkenswert moderne Gedankengänge in den betreffenden Schriften aufgezeigt. Ein abschließendes Fazit fasst die wichtigsten Zielsetzungen und Prinzipien der Katalogisierung noch einmal mit Bezug auf die verwendete Literatur zur Theorie der Informationsorganisation zusammen.
    Type
    a
  6. De Rijk Spanhoff, E.: Principle issues : catalog paradigms, old and new (2003) 0.00
    0.0016913437 = product of:
      0.0033826875 = sum of:
        0.0033826875 = product of:
          0.006765375 = sum of:
            0.006765375 = weight(_text_:a in 4060) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.006765375 = score(doc=4060,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 4060, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4060)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Type
    a
  7. Takawashi, T.: Cataloging in Japan : relationship between Japanese and Western cataloging rules (2003) 0.00
    0.0016913437 = product of:
      0.0033826875 = sum of:
        0.0033826875 = product of:
          0.006765375 = sum of:
            0.006765375 = weight(_text_:a in 4069) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.006765375 = score(doc=4069,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 4069, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4069)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Type
    a
  8. Popst, H.; Croissant, C.R.: ¬The development of descriptive cataloging in Germany (2002) 0.00
    0.0016913437 = product of:
      0.0033826875 = sum of:
        0.0033826875 = product of:
          0.006765375 = sum of:
            0.006765375 = weight(_text_:a in 5487) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.006765375 = score(doc=5487,freq=8.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 5487, product of:
                  2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                    8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5487)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    This article discusses the development of descriptive cataloging in Germany and the evolution of cataloging principles. The Instruktionen für die alphabetischen Kataloge der preußischen Bibliotheken (Instructions for the Alphabetic Catalogs of the Prussian Libraries, known as the Prussian Instructions, or PI, for short) were published in 1899. The so-called Berliner Anweisungen ("Berlin Instructions," Instructions for the Alphabetic Catalog in Public Libraries) appeared in 1938. Discussion for reform of cataloging rules began in the 1950s and received impetus from the International Conference on Cataloging Principles in Paris in 1961 and from the International Meeting of Cataloging Experts in Copenhagen in 1969. Preliminary drafts of the new Regeln für die alphabetische Katalogisierung, RAK (Rules for Descriptive Cataloging) were issued between 1969 and 1976; the complete edition of the RAK was published in the German Democratic Republic (East Germany) in 1976 and in a slightly different version in 1977 for the Federal Republic of Germany (West Germany). A version for academic libraries appeared in 1983, followed by a version for public libraries in 1986. Between 1987 and 1997, supplementary rules for special categories of materials were published.
    Type
    a
  9. Svenonius, E.: Bibliographic entities and their uses (2018) 0.00
    0.0016913437 = product of:
      0.0033826875 = sum of:
        0.0033826875 = product of:
          0.006765375 = sum of:
            0.006765375 = weight(_text_:a in 5187) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.006765375 = score(doc=5187,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 5187, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5187)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Type
    a
  10. Denton, W.: FRBR and the history of cataloging (2007) 0.00
    0.001674345 = product of:
      0.00334869 = sum of:
        0.00334869 = product of:
          0.00669738 = sum of:
            0.00669738 = weight(_text_:a in 1677) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.00669738 = score(doc=1677,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.12611452 = fieldWeight in 1677, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1677)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    An explanation of where FRBR (Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records) comes from, given by a look at the work of librarians such as Panizzi, Cutter, Ranganathan, and Lubetzky, and an examination of four themes in the history of library cataloging: the use of axioms to explain the purpose of catalogs, the importance of user needs, the idea of the "work," and standardization and internationalization.
    Type
    a
  11. Dousa, T.M.: E. Wyndham Hulme's classification of the attributes of books : On an early model of a core bibliographical entity (2017) 0.00
    0.0015127839 = product of:
      0.0030255679 = sum of:
        0.0030255679 = product of:
          0.0060511357 = sum of:
            0.0060511357 = weight(_text_:a in 3859) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0060511357 = score(doc=3859,freq=10.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.11394546 = fieldWeight in 3859, product of:
                  3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                    10.0 = termFreq=10.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3859)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Modelling bibliographical entities is a prominent activity within knowledge organization today. Current models of bibliographic entities, such as Functional Requirements for Bibliographical Records (FRBR) and the Bibliographic Framework (BIBFRAME), take inspiration from data - modelling methods developed by computer scientists from the mid - 1970s on. Thus, it would seem that the modelling of bibliographic entities is an activity of very recent vintage. However, it is possible to find examples of bibliographical models from earlier periods of knowledge organization. The purpose of this paper is to draw attention to one such model, outlined by the early 20th - century British classification theorist E. Wyndham Hulme in his essay on "Principles of Book Classification" (1911 - 1912). There, Hulme set forth a classification of various attributes by which books can conceivably be classified. These he first divided into accidental and inseparable attributes. Accidental attributes were subdivided into edition - level and copy - level attributes and inseparable attitudes, into physical and non - physical attributes. Comparison of Hulme's classification of attributes with those of FRBR and BIBFRAME 2.0 reveals that the different classes of attributes in Hulme's classification correspond to groups of attributes associated with different bibliographical entities in those models. These later models assume the existence of different bibliographic entities in an abstraction hierarchy among which attributes are distributed, whereas Hulme posited only a single entity - the book - , whose various aspects he clustered into different classes of attributes. Thus, Hulme's model offers an interesting alternative to current assumptions about how to conceptualize the relationship between attributes and entities in the bibliographical universe.
    Type
    a
  12. Dousa, T.M.: E. Wyndham Hulme's classification of the attributes of books : on an early model of a core bibliographical entity (2017) 0.00
    0.0015127839 = product of:
      0.0030255679 = sum of:
        0.0030255679 = product of:
          0.0060511357 = sum of:
            0.0060511357 = weight(_text_:a in 4141) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0060511357 = score(doc=4141,freq=10.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.11394546 = fieldWeight in 4141, product of:
                  3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                    10.0 = termFreq=10.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4141)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Modelling bibliographical entities is a prominent activity within knowledge organization today. Current models of bibliographic entities, such as Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) and the Bibliographic Framework (BIBFRAME), take inspiration from data-modelling methods developed by computer scientists from the mid-1970s on. Thus, it would seem that the modelling of bibliographic entities is an activity of very recent vintage. However, it is possible to find examples of bibliographical models from earlier periods of knowledge organization. The purpose of this paper is to draw attention to one such model, outlined by the early twentiethcentury British classification theorist E. Wyndham Hulme in his essay on "Principles of Book Classification" (1911-1912). There, Hulme set forth a classification of various attributes by which books can be classified. These he first divided into "accidental" and "inseparable" attributes. Accidental attributes were subdivided into edition-level and copy-level attributes and inseparable attitudes, into "physical" and "non-physical" attributes. Comparison of Hulme's classification of attributes with those of FRBR and BIBFRAME 2.0 reveals that the different classes of attributes in Hulme's classification correspond to groups of attributes associated with different bibliographical entities in those models. These later models assume the existence of different bibliographic entities in an abstract hierarchy among which attributes are distributed, whereas Hulme posited only a single entity-the book-whose various aspects he clustered into different classes of attributes. Thus, Hulme's model offers an interesting alternative to current assumptions about how to conceptualize the relationship between attributes and entities in the bibliographical universe.
    Type
    a
  13. Smiraglia, R.P.: ¬The history of "The Work" in the modern catalog (2003) 0.00
    0.0014647468 = product of:
      0.0029294936 = sum of:
        0.0029294936 = product of:
          0.005858987 = sum of:
            0.005858987 = weight(_text_:a in 5631) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.005858987 = score(doc=5631,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.11032722 = fieldWeight in 5631, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5631)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    From a historical perspective, one could consider the modern library catalog to be that bibliographical apparatus that stretches at least from Thomas Hyde's catalog for the Bodleian Library at Oxford to the near present. Mai and other recent authors have suggested postmodern approaches to knowledge organization. In these, we realize that there is no single and unique order of knowledge or documents but rather there are many appropriate orders, all of them contextually dependent. Works (oeuvres, opera, Werke, etc.), as are musical works, literary works, works of art, etc., are and always have been key entities for information retrieval. Yet catalogs in the modern era were designed to inventory (first) and retrieve (second) specific documents. From Hyde's catalog for the Bodleian until the late twentieth century, developments are epistemologically pragmatic--reflected in the structure of catalog records, in the rules for main entry headings, and in the rules for filing in card catalogs. After 1980 developments become empirical-reflected in research conducted by Tillett, Yee, Smiraglia, Leazer, Carlyle, and Vellucci. The influence of empiricism on the pragmatic notion of "the work" has led to increased focus on the concept of the work. The challenge for the postmodern online catalog is to fully embrace the concept of "the work," finally to facilitate it as a prime objective for information retrieval.
    Type
    a
  14. Smiraglia, R.P.: ¬The history of "The Work" in the modern catalog (2003) 0.00
    0.0014647468 = product of:
      0.0029294936 = sum of:
        0.0029294936 = product of:
          0.005858987 = sum of:
            0.005858987 = weight(_text_:a in 5652) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.005858987 = score(doc=5652,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.11032722 = fieldWeight in 5652, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5652)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    From a historical perspective, one could consider the modern library catalog to be that bibliographical apparatus that stretches at least from Thomas Hyde's catalog for the Bodleian Library at Oxford to the near present. Mai and other recent authors have suggested postmodern approaches to knowledge organization. In these, we realize that there is no single and unique order of knowledge or documents but rather there are many appropriate orders, all of them contextually dependent. Works (oeuvres, opera, Werke, etc.), as are musical works, literary works, works of art, etc., are and always have been key entities for information retrieval. Yet catalogs in the modern era were designed to inventory (first) and retrieve (second) specific documents. From Hyde's catalog for the Bodleian until the late twentieth century, developments are epistemologically pragmatic--reflected in the structure of catalog records, in the rules for main entry headings, and in the rules for filing in card catalogs. After 1980 developments become empirical-reflected in research conducted by Tillett, Yee, Smiraglia, Leazer, Carlyle, and Vellucci. The influence of empiricism on the pragmatic notion of "the work" has led to increased focus on the concept of the work. The challenge for the postmodern online catalog is to fully embrace the concept of "the work," finally to facilitate it as a prime objective for information retrieval.
    Type
    a
  15. Takawashi, T.: Cataloging in Japan : relationship between Japanese and Western cataloging rules (2002) 0.00
    0.0014351527 = product of:
      0.0028703054 = sum of:
        0.0028703054 = product of:
          0.005740611 = sum of:
            0.005740611 = weight(_text_:a in 5490) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.005740611 = score(doc=5490,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.10809815 = fieldWeight in 5490, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5490)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    In 1943 the Japanese League of Young Librarians published Nippon Catalog Rules (NCR1942) based on ALA 1908, and adopted the author main-entry system for Japanese and Western materials. After World War II, the Japan Library Association (JLA) compiled and published NCR1952, based on ALA 1949 and LC 1949 but maintained the author main-entry system. The main-entry system was then replaced by an alternative heading method, which came to be known as the Description-Independent-System (DIS). NCR1965 adopted the main entry principle, which was based on the Paris Principles of 1961. NCR1977 was compiled and published by the JLA Cataloging Committee and based upon a "no-main-entry principle." Then in 1987, the Committee published the standard edition of the rules, which was completely compatible with the International Standard Bibliographic Description (ISBD). NCR1987R was published in 1994 and NCR1987R01 in 2001, which included revised "Chapter 9: Computer Files," devised according to ISBD(ER).
    Type
    a
  16. Genetasio, G.: ¬The International Cataloguing Principles and their future", in: JLIS.it 3/1 (2012) (2012) 0.00
    0.0014351527 = product of:
      0.0028703054 = sum of:
        0.0028703054 = product of:
          0.005740611 = sum of:
            0.005740611 = weight(_text_:a in 2625) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.005740611 = score(doc=2625,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.10809815 = fieldWeight in 2625, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2625)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    The article aims to provide an update on the 2009 Statement of International Cataloguing Principles (ICP) and on the status of work on the Statement by the IFLA Cataloguing Section. The article begins with a summary of the drafting process of the ICP by the IME ICC, International Meeting of Experts on an International Cataloguing Code, focusing in particular on the first meeting (IME ICC1) and on the earlier drafts of the 2009 Statement. It then analyzes both the major innovations and the unsatisfactory aspects of the ICP. Finally, it explains and comments on the recent documents by the IFLA Cataloguing Section relating to the ICP, which express their intention to revise the Statement and to verify the convenience of drawing up an international cataloguing code. The latter intention is considered in detail and criticized by the author in the light of the recent publication of the RDA, Resource Description and Access. The article is complemented by an updated bibliography on the ICP.
    Type
    a
  17. Miksa, S.D.: Cataloging principles and objectives : history and development (2021) 0.00
    0.0014351527 = product of:
      0.0028703054 = sum of:
        0.0028703054 = product of:
          0.005740611 = sum of:
            0.005740611 = weight(_text_:a in 702) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.005740611 = score(doc=702,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.10809815 = fieldWeight in 702, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=702)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Cataloging principles and objectives guide the formation of cataloging rules governing the organization of information within the library catalog, as well as the function of the catalog itself. Changes in technologies wrought by the internet and the web have been the driving forces behind shifting cataloging practice and reconfigurations of cataloging rules. Modern cataloging principles and objectives started in 1841 with the creation of Panizzi's 91 Rules for the British Museum and gained momentum with Charles Cutter's Rules for Descriptive Cataloging (1904). The first Statement of International Cataloguing Principles (ICP) was adopted in 1961, holding their place through such codifications as AACR and AACR2 in the 1970s and 1980s. Revisions accelerated starting in 2003 with the three original FR models. The Library Reference Model (LRM) in 2017 acted as a catalyst for the evolution of principles and objectives culminating in the creation of Resource Description and Access (RDA) in 2013.
    Type
    a
  18. Glasby, D.: Historical background and review of serials cataloging rules (1990) 0.00
    0.001353075 = product of:
      0.00270615 = sum of:
        0.00270615 = product of:
          0.0054123 = sum of:
            0.0054123 = weight(_text_:a in 7164) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0054123 = score(doc=7164,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.10191591 = fieldWeight in 7164, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7164)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Type
    a
  19. Bianchini, C.; Guerrini, M.: From bibliographic models to cataloguing rules : remarks on FRBR, ICP, ISBD, and RDA and the relationships between them (2009) 0.00
    0.0011839407 = product of:
      0.0023678814 = sum of:
        0.0023678814 = product of:
          0.0047357627 = sum of:
            0.0047357627 = weight(_text_:a in 2973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0047357627 = score(doc=2973,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.089176424 = fieldWeight in 2973, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2973)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Type
    a
  20. Buizza, P.: Bibliographic control and authority control from Paris principles to the present (2004) 0.00
    0.0010148063 = product of:
      0.0020296127 = sum of:
        0.0020296127 = product of:
          0.0040592253 = sum of:
            0.0040592253 = weight(_text_:a in 5667) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0040592253 = score(doc=5667,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.07643694 = fieldWeight in 5667, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5667)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Type
    a