Search (33 results, page 1 of 2)

  • × theme_ss:"Formalerschließung"
  • × theme_ss:"Metadaten"
  • × type_ss:"a"
  1. Preminger, M.; Rype, I.; Ådland, M.K.; Massey, D.; Tallerås, K.: ¬The public library metadata landscape : the case of Norway 2017-2018 (2020) 0.04
    0.041197337 = product of:
      0.16478935 = sum of:
        0.08101445 = weight(_text_:libraries in 5802) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08101445 = score(doc=5802,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.13017908 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.6223308 = fieldWeight in 5802, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5802)
        0.0837749 = weight(_text_:case in 5802) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0837749 = score(doc=5802,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1742197 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.48085782 = fieldWeight in 5802, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5802)
      0.25 = coord(2/8)
    
    Abstract
    The aim of this paper is to gauge the cataloging practices within the public library sector seen from the catalog with Norway as a case, based on a sample of records from public libraries and cataloging agencies. Findings suggest that libraries make few changes to records they import from central agencies, and that larger libraries make more changes than smaller libraries. Findings also suggest that libraries catalog and modify records with their patrons in mind, and though the extent is not large, cataloging proficiency is still required in the public library domain, at least in larger libraries, in order to ensure correct and consistent metadata.
  2. Boydston, J.M.K.; Leysen, J.M.: Observations on the catalogers' role in descriptive metadata creation in academic libraries (2006) 0.02
    0.023077954 = product of:
      0.092311814 = sum of:
        0.03307401 = weight(_text_:libraries in 232) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03307401 = score(doc=232,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13017908 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.25406548 = fieldWeight in 232, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=232)
        0.059237804 = weight(_text_:case in 232) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.059237804 = score(doc=232,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1742197 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.34001783 = fieldWeight in 232, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=232)
      0.25 = coord(2/8)
    
    Abstract
    This article examines the case for the participation of catalogers in the creation of descriptive metadata. Metadata creation is an extension of the catalogers' existing skills, abilities, and knowledge. As such, it should be encouraged and supported. However, issues in this process, such as cost, supply of catalogers, and the need for further training will also be examined. The authors use examples from the literature and their own experiences in descriptive metadata creation. Suggestions for future research on the topic are included.
  3. Tennant, R.: ¬A bibliographic metadata infrastructure for the twenty-first century (2004) 0.02
    0.017042633 = product of:
      0.06817053 = sum of:
        0.037798867 = weight(_text_:libraries in 2845) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037798867 = score(doc=2845,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13017908 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.29036054 = fieldWeight in 2845, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2845)
        0.03037167 = product of:
          0.06074334 = sum of:
            0.06074334 = weight(_text_:22 in 2845) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06074334 = score(doc=2845,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.13876937 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03962768 = 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)
      0.25 = coord(2/8)
    
    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
  4. Rogers, D.: Cataloguing Internet resources : the evolution of the Dublin Core metadata set (1997) 0.01
    0.0148187205 = product of:
      0.059274882 = sum of:
        0.037798867 = weight(_text_:libraries in 903) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037798867 = score(doc=903,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13017908 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.29036054 = fieldWeight in 903, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=903)
        0.021476014 = product of:
          0.042952027 = sum of:
            0.042952027 = weight(_text_:22 in 903) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.042952027 = score(doc=903,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13876937 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03962768 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 903, 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=903)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(2/8)
    
    Abstract
    Recently the view has developed that electronic resources require the same level of cataloguing as the physical resources found in libraries, with the effect that a number of guidelines for cataloguing Internet resources have appeared. Describes one such standard for resource description, the Dublin Core metadata set, the ongoing refinement of the metadata elements and the application of the Dublin Core metadata set
    Source
    Cataloguing Australia. 23(1997) nos.1/2, S.17-22
  5. Gorman, M.: Metadata or cataloguing? : a false choice (1999) 0.01
    0.0148187205 = product of:
      0.059274882 = sum of:
        0.037798867 = weight(_text_:libraries in 6095) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037798867 = score(doc=6095,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13017908 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.29036054 = fieldWeight in 6095, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6095)
        0.021476014 = product of:
          0.042952027 = sum of:
            0.042952027 = weight(_text_:22 in 6095) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.042952027 = score(doc=6095,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13876937 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03962768 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 6095, 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=6095)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(2/8)
    
    Abstract
    Libraries, their collections, and bibliographic control are essential components of the provision of access to recorded knowledge. Cataloging is a primary method of bibliographic control. Full or traditional cataloging is very expensive, but relying on keyword searching is inadequate. Alternatives for a solution to cataloging needs for electronic resources including the use of metadata and the Dublin Core are examined. Many questions exist regarding the long-term future of today's electronic documents. Recommendations are made for preserving recorded knowledge and information in the electronic resources for future generations
    Source
    Journal of Internet cataloging. 2(1999) no.1, S.5-22
  6. Hill, J.S.: Analog people for digital dreams : staffing and educational considerations for cataloging and metadata professionals (2005) 0.01
    0.0148187205 = product of:
      0.059274882 = sum of:
        0.037798867 = weight(_text_:libraries in 126) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037798867 = score(doc=126,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13017908 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.29036054 = fieldWeight in 126, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=126)
        0.021476014 = product of:
          0.042952027 = sum of:
            0.042952027 = weight(_text_:22 in 126) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.042952027 = score(doc=126,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13876937 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03962768 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 126, 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=126)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(2/8)
    
    Abstract
    As libraries attempt to incorporate increasing amounts of electronic resources into their catalogs, utilizing a growing variety of metadata standards, library and information science programs are grappling with how to educate catalogers to meet these challenges. In this paper, an employer considers the characteristics and skills that catalogers will need and how they might acquire them.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  7. Gömpel, R.; Altenhöner, R.; Kunz, M.; Oehlschläger, S.; Werner, C.: Weltkongress Bibliothek und Information, 70. IFLA-Generalkonferenz in Buenos Aires : Aus den Veranstaltungen der Division IV Bibliographic Control, der Core Activities ICABS und UNIMARC sowie der Information Technology Section (2004) 0.01
    0.0133717535 = product of:
      0.03565801 = sum of:
        0.013363917 = weight(_text_:libraries in 2874) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013363917 = score(doc=2874,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.13017908 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.10265795 = fieldWeight in 2874, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2874)
        0.016925087 = weight(_text_:case in 2874) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016925087 = score(doc=2874,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1742197 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.09714795 = fieldWeight in 2874, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2874)
        0.0053690034 = product of:
          0.010738007 = sum of:
            0.010738007 = weight(_text_:22 in 2874) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.010738007 = score(doc=2874,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13876937 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03962768 = queryNorm
                0.07738023 = fieldWeight in 2874, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2874)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.375 = coord(3/8)
    
    Abstract
    "Libraries: Tools for Education and Development" war das Motto der 70. IFLA-Generalkonferenz, dem Weltkongress Bibliothek und Information, der vom 22.-27. August 2004 in Buenos Aires, Argentinien, und damit erstmals in Lateinamerika stattfand. Rund 3.000 Teilnehmerinnen und Teilnehmer, davon ein Drittel aus spanischsprachigen Ländern, allein 600 aus Argentinien, besuchten die von der IFLA und dem nationalen Organisationskomitee gut organisierte Tagung mit mehr als 200 Sitzungen und Veranstaltungen. Aus Deutschland waren laut Teilnehmerverzeichnis leider nur 45 Kolleginnen und Kollegen angereist, womit ihre Zahl wieder auf das Niveau von Boston gesunken ist. Erfreulicherweise gab es nunmehr bereits im dritten Jahr eine deutschsprachige Ausgabe des IFLA-Express. Auch in diesem Jahr soll hier über die Veranstaltungen der Division IV Bibliographic Control berichtet werden. Die Arbeit der Division mit ihren Sektionen Bibliography, Cataloguing, Classification and Indexing sowie der neuen Sektion Knowledge Management bildet einen der Schwerpunkte der IFLA-Arbeit, die dabei erzielten konkreten Ergebnisse und Empfehlungen haben maßgeblichen Einfluss auf die tägliche Arbeit der Bibliothekarinnen und Bibliothekare. Erstmals wird auch ausführlich über die Arbeit der Core Activities ICABS und UNIMARC und der Information Technology Section berichtet.
    Content
    Classification and Indexing Section (Sektion Klassifikation und Indexierung) Die Working Group an Guidelines for Multilingual Thesauri hat ihre Arbeit abgeschlossen, die Richtlinien werden Ende 2004 im IFLAnet zur Verfügung stehen. Die 2003 ins Leben gerufene Arbeitsgruppe zu Mindeststandards der Inhaltserschließung in Nationalbibliographien hat sich in Absprache mit den Mitgliedern des Standing Committee auf den Namen "Guidelines for minimal requirements for subject access by national bibliographic agencies" verständigt. Als Grundlage der zukünftigen Arbeit soll der "Survey an Subject Heading Languages Used in National Libraries and Bibliographies" von Magda HeinerFreiling dienen. Davon ausgehend soll eruiert werden, welche Arten von Medienwerken mit welchen Instrumentarien und in welcher Tiefe erschlossen werden. Eine weitere Arbeitsgruppe der Sektion befasst sich mit dem sachlichen Zugriff auf Netzpublikationen (Working Group an Subject Access to Web Resources). Die Veranstaltung "Implementation and adaption of global tools for subject access to local needs" fand regen Zuspruch. Drei Vortragende zeigten auf, wie in ihrem Sprachgebiet die Subject Headings der Library of Congress (LoC) übernommen werden (Development of a Spanish subject heading list und Subject indexing in Sweden) bzw. wie sich die Zusammenarbeit mit der LoC gestalten lässt, um den besonderen terminologischen Bedürfnissen eines Sprach- und Kulturraums außerhalb der USA Rechnung zu tragen (The SACO Program in Latin America). Aus deutscher Sicht verdiente der Vortrag "Subject indexing between international standards and local context - the Italian case" besondere Beachtung. Die Entwicklung eines Regelwerks zur verbalen Sacherschließung und die Erarbeitung einer italienischen Schlagwortnormdatei folgen nämlich erklärtermaßen der deutschen Vorgehensweise mit RSWK und SWD.
  8. Ilik, V.; Storlien, J.; Olivarez, J.: Metadata makeover (2014) 0.01
    0.01296638 = product of:
      0.05186552 = sum of:
        0.03307401 = weight(_text_:libraries in 2606) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03307401 = score(doc=2606,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13017908 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.25406548 = fieldWeight in 2606, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2606)
        0.018791512 = product of:
          0.037583023 = sum of:
            0.037583023 = weight(_text_:22 in 2606) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.037583023 = score(doc=2606,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13876937 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03962768 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2606, 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=2606)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(2/8)
    
    Abstract
    Catalogers have become fluent in information technology such as web design skills, HyperText Markup Language (HTML), Cascading Stylesheets (CSS), eXensible Markup Language (XML), and programming languages. The knowledge gained from learning information technology can be used to experiment with methods of transforming one metadata schema into another using various software solutions. This paper will discuss the use of eXtensible Stylesheet Language Transformations (XSLT) for repurposing, editing, and reformatting metadata. Catalogers have the requisite skills for working with any metadata schema, and if they are excluded from metadata work, libraries are wasting a valuable human resource.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  9. Wisser, K.M.; O'Brien Roper, J.: Maximizing metadata : exploring the EAD-MARC relationship (2003) 0.01
    0.011708075 = product of:
      0.0468323 = sum of:
        0.033409793 = weight(_text_:libraries in 154) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033409793 = score(doc=154,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.13017908 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.25664487 = fieldWeight in 154, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=154)
        0.013422508 = product of:
          0.026845016 = sum of:
            0.026845016 = weight(_text_:22 in 154) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.026845016 = score(doc=154,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13876937 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03962768 = 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)
      0.25 = coord(2/8)
    
    Abstract
    Encoded Archival Description (EAD) has provided a new way to approach manuscript and archival collection representation. A review of previous representational practices and problems highlights the benefits of using EAD. This new approach should be considered a partner rather than an adversary in the access providing process. Technological capabilities now allow for multiple metadata schemas to be employed in the creation of the finding aid. Crosswalks allow for MARC records to be generated from the detailed encoding of an EAD finding aid. In the process of creating these crosswalks and detailed encoding, EAD has generated more changes in traditional processes and procedures than originally imagined. The North Carolina State University (NCSU) Libraries sought to test the process of crosswalking EAD to MARC, investigating how this process used technology as well as changed physical procedures. By creating a complex and indepth EAD template for finding aids, with accompanying related encoding analogs embedded within the element structure, MARC records were generated that required minor editing and revision for inclusion in the NCSU Libraries OPAC. The creation of this bridge between EAD and MARC has stimulated theoretical discussions about the role of collaboration, technology, and expertise in the ongoing struggle to maximize access to our collections. While this study is a only a first attempt at harnessing this potential, a presentation of the tensions, struggles, and successes provides illumination to some of the larger issues facing special collections today.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  10. DeZelar-Tiedman, C.: Exploring user-contributed metadata's potential to enhance access to literary works (2011) 0.01
    0.01111404 = product of:
      0.04445616 = sum of:
        0.02834915 = weight(_text_:libraries in 2595) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02834915 = score(doc=2595,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13017908 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.2177704 = fieldWeight in 2595, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2595)
        0.01610701 = product of:
          0.03221402 = sum of:
            0.03221402 = weight(_text_:22 in 2595) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03221402 = score(doc=2595,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.13876937 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03962768 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2595, 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=2595)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(2/8)
    
    Abstract
    Academic libraries have moved toward providing social networking features, such as tagging, in their library catalogs. To explore whether user tags can enhance access to individual literary works, the author obtained a sample of individual works of English and American literature from the twentieth and twenty-first centuries from a large academic library catalog and searched them in LibraryThing. The author compared match rates, the availability of subject headings and tags across various literary forms, and the terminology used in tags versus controlled-vocabulary headings on a subset of records. In addition, she evaluated the usefulness of available LibraryThing tags for the library catalog records that lacked subject headings. Options for utilizing the subject terms available in sources outside the local catalog also are discussed.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  11. Lopatin, L.: Metadata practices in academic and non-academic libraries for digital projects : a survey (2010) 0.01
    0.0093756 = product of:
      0.0750048 = sum of:
        0.0750048 = weight(_text_:libraries in 4165) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0750048 = score(doc=4165,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.13017908 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.57616633 = fieldWeight in 4165, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4165)
      0.125 = coord(1/8)
    
    Abstract
    This article presents the results of a survey examining and comparing the metadata practices of academic and non-academic libraries regarding digital projects. It explores the types of metadata and vocabularies utilized, issues of interoperability, end-user-created metadata, and staffing for metadata planning and creation. Participants from 87 academic libraries and 40 non-academic libraries responded to the survey. The survey found that, despite their different environments, academic and non-academic libraries engage in similar metadata practices. The majority of the participating libraries have metadata librarians, who are the primary staff members responsible for all metadata activities. Academic libraries tend to use more metadata schemes, plan for metadata interoperability more frequently, and are more likely to have created new positions responsible for metadata for digital projects.
  12. Siripan, P.: Metadata and trends of cataloguing in Thai libraries (2000) 0.01
    0.008268503 = product of:
      0.06614802 = sum of:
        0.06614802 = weight(_text_:libraries in 6338) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06614802 = score(doc=6338,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13017908 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.50813097 = fieldWeight in 6338, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6338)
      0.125 = coord(1/8)
    
  13. Kleeck, D. Van; Nakano, H.; Langford, G.; Shelton, T.; Lundgren, J.; O'Dell, A.J.: Managing bibliographic data quality for electronic resources (2017) 0.01
    0.0074047255 = product of:
      0.059237804 = sum of:
        0.059237804 = weight(_text_:case in 5160) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.059237804 = score(doc=5160,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1742197 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.34001783 = fieldWeight in 5160, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.3964143 = idf(docFreq=1480, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5160)
      0.125 = coord(1/8)
    
    Abstract
    This article presents a case study of quality management issues for electronic resource metadata to assess the support of user tasks (find, select, and obtain library resources) and potential for increased efficiencies in acquisitions and cataloging workflows. The authors evaluated the quality of existing bibliographic records (mostly vendor supplied) for e-resource collections as compared with records for the same collections in OCLC's WorldShare Collection Manager (WCM). Findings are that WCM records better support user tasks by containing more summaries and tables of contents; other checkpoints are largely comparable between the two source record groups. The transition to WCM records is discussed.
  14. Nichols introduces MARCit (1998) 0.01
    0.0070872875 = product of:
      0.0566983 = sum of:
        0.0566983 = weight(_text_:libraries in 1438) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0566983 = score(doc=1438,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13017908 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.4355408 = fieldWeight in 1438, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1438)
      0.125 = coord(1/8)
    
    Source
    Advanced technology libraries. 27(1998) no.2, S.10-11
  15. Edmunds, J.: Roadmap to nowhere : BIBFLOW, BIBFRAME, and linked data for libraries (2017) 0.01
    0.006137771 = product of:
      0.04910217 = sum of:
        0.04910217 = weight(_text_:libraries in 3523) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04910217 = score(doc=3523,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.13017908 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.3771894 = fieldWeight in 3523, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3523)
      0.125 = coord(1/8)
    
    Abstract
    On December 12, 2016, Carl Stahmer and MacKenzie Smith presented at the CNI Members Fall Meeting about the BIBFLOW project, self-described on Twitter as "a two-year project of the UC Davis University Library and Zepheira investigating the future of library technical services." In her opening remarks, Ms. Smith, University Librarian at UC Davis, stated that one of the goals of the project was to devise a roadmap "to get from where we are today, which is kind of the 1970s with a little lipstick on it, to 2020, which is where we're going to be very soon." The notion that where libraries are today is somehow behind the times is one of the commonly heard rationales behind a move to linked data. Stated more precisely: - Libraries devote considerable time and resources to producing high-quality bibliographic metadata - This metadata is stored in unconnected silos - This metadata is in a format (MARC) that is incompatible with technologies of the emerging Semantic Web - The visibility of library metadata is diminished as a result of the two points above Are these assertions true? If yes, is linked data the solution?
  16. Efthimiadis, E.N.; Carlyle, A.: Organizing Internet resources : metadata and the Web (1997) 0.01
    0.00531474 = product of:
      0.04251792 = sum of:
        0.04251792 = product of:
          0.08503584 = sum of:
            0.08503584 = weight(_text_:area in 2561) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.08503584 = score(doc=2561,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.1952553 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.927245 = idf(docFreq=870, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03962768 = queryNorm
                0.43551105 = fieldWeight in 2561, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.927245 = idf(docFreq=870, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2561)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.125 = coord(1/8)
    
    Abstract
    Introduces a special section on organizing Internet resources. Approaches based on fulltext indexing of the content of Internet sites are not an adequate solution for providing access to Internet resources. Adding metadata can provide an overview of a subject area and improve the user's ability to discriminate among similar sources. Introduces the articles in this section that explore issues associated with the provision of metadata
  17. Tillett, B.B.: AACR2 and metadata : library opportunities in the global semantic Web (2003) 0.01
    0.005011469 = product of:
      0.040091753 = sum of:
        0.040091753 = weight(_text_:libraries in 5510) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040091753 = score(doc=5510,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.13017908 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.30797386 = fieldWeight in 5510, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5510)
      0.125 = coord(1/8)
    
    Abstract
    Explores the opportunities for libraries to contribute to the proposed global "Semantic Web." Library name and subject authority files, including work that IFLA has done related to a new view of "Universal Bibliographic Control" in the Internet environment and the work underway in the U.S. and Europe, are making a reality of the virtual international authority file on the Web. The bibliographic and authority records created according to AACR2 reflect standards for metadata that libraries have provided for years. New opportunities for using these records in the digital world are described (interoperability), including mapping with Dublin Core metadata. AACR2 recently updated Chapter 9 on Electronic Resources. That process and highlights of the changes are described, including Library of Congress' rule interpretations.
  18. Han, M.-J.K.; Ream-Sotomayor, N.E.; Lampron, P.; Kudeki, D.: "Making Metadata Maker" (2016) 0.01
    0.005011469 = product of:
      0.040091753 = sum of:
        0.040091753 = weight(_text_:libraries in 2883) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040091753 = score(doc=2883,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.13017908 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.30797386 = fieldWeight in 2883, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2883)
      0.125 = coord(1/8)
    
    Abstract
    Cataloging and metadata operations in academic libraries are focusing on original cataloging of their unique and hidden collections that have not been available to users because of a lack of metadata. However, creating MARC format metadata is an expensive process; libraries need professional catalogers with appropriate experience and knowledge or must train staff to do the work. To improve the cataloging and metadata creation workflow, the University of Illinois at Urbana- Champaign Library developed a web application, Metadata Maker, which allows anyone to create metadata in four different formats, including MARC21 for an online public access catalog, regardless of their familiarity with metadata standards or systems that utilize the metadata. Released as an open source application, Metadata Maker supports diacritics and Unicode non-Roman language encoding, and creates metadata records that ensure discovery and access of unique library collections.
  19. Jul, E.: Cataloguing Internet resources : survey and prospects (1997) 0.00
    0.0047248583 = product of:
      0.037798867 = sum of:
        0.037798867 = weight(_text_:libraries in 7199) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037798867 = score(doc=7199,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13017908 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.29036054 = fieldWeight in 7199, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7199)
      0.125 = coord(1/8)
    
    Abstract
    Describes key events in the development of cataloguing of Internet resources and ssurveys current activities. The fundamental questions are: are Internet resources worth cataloguing; is traditional MARC/AACR2 cataloguing appropriate for Internet resources; and how should resources that change location be dealt with? Libraries should start by cataloguing an Internet resource. Bibliographic records can be used to drive Web applications. Metadata holds considerable promise
  20. Wool, G.: ¬A mediation on metadata (1998) 0.00
    0.0047248583 = product of:
      0.037798867 = sum of:
        0.037798867 = weight(_text_:libraries in 2210) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037798867 = score(doc=2210,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13017908 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.29036054 = fieldWeight in 2210, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2210)
      0.125 = coord(1/8)
    
    Footnote
    Contribution to an issue devoted to e-serials: publishers, libraries, users, and standards, part 1