Search (14 results, page 1 of 1)

0.021371057 = product of:
  0.032056585 = sum of:
    0.016631098 = weight(_text_:to in 191) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016631098 = score(doc=191,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.20086816 = fieldWeight in 191, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=191)
    0.015425485 = product of:
      0.03085097 = sum of:
        0.03085097 = weight(_text_:22 in 191) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03085097 = score(doc=191,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15947726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045541126 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 191, 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=191)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

International efforts to provide authority control include the work of IFLA, the AUTHOR Project funded by the European Commission, and related work conducted under the auspices of the ICA/CDS. IFLA developed the guidelines Form and Structure of Corporate Headings, documented the formulation of names along the lines of national origin in its publication Names of Persons, and published Guidelines for Authority and Reference Entries. Attention has shifted from a single authority record for each entity that would be shared internationally through the exchange of records to linking parallel authority records for the same entity. The access control of the future will account for difference in cataloging rules, transliteration standards, and cultural differences within the same language as well as for the need for different languages and scripts and will enable users to display the script and form of a heading that they expect. Project AUTHOR is a shared set of resource national authority files that used selections from the authority files of France, the United Kingdom, Spain, Portugal, and Belgium. The prototype tested an adaptation of Z39.50 server software for authority records and displays for user interface. An international standard for authority control records has been developed for corporate bodies, persons, and families. Through joint meetings efforts have been synchronized to develop authority control at the international level.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.011031823 = product of:
  0.033095468 = sum of:
    0.033095468 = weight(_text_:to in 5667) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033095468 = score(doc=5667,freq=22.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.39972258 = fieldWeight in 5667, product of:
          4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
            22.0 = termFreq=22.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5667)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Forty years ago the ICCP in Paris laid the foundations of international co-operation in descriptive cataloging without explicitly speaking of authority control. Some of the factors in the evolution of authority control are the development of catalogs (from card catalog to local automation, to today's OPAC on the Web) and services provided by libraries (from individual service to local users to system networks, to the World Wide Web), as well as international agreements on cataloging (from Paris Principles to the UBC programme, to the report on Mandatory data elements for internationally shared resource authority records). This evolution progressed from the principle of uniform heading to the definition of authority entries and records, and from the responsibility of national bibliographic agencies for the form of the names of their own authors to be shared internationally to the concept of authorized equivalent heading. Some issues of the present state are the persisting differences among national rules and the aim of respecting both local culture and language and international readability.

0.009505464 = product of:
  0.028516391 = sum of:
    0.028516391 = weight(_text_:to in 5663) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028516391 = score(doc=5663,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.34441712 = fieldWeight in 5663, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5663)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The teaching of authority control in schools of library and information science has been given little attention until recently. A 2002 article reported that only a little over a third of respondents to a questionnaire believed they had learned about authority control in school. This paper reports a survey of teachers to determine how much authority control is taught in school. Respondents all emphasized the importance of trying to teach authority control to all students of library science and enthusiastically shared their methodologies, while admitting that it is a difficult concept to get across to students. Teachers also face non-understanding from colleagues, lack of course time, and competition from technology courses.

0.00940797 = product of:
  0.02822391 = sum of:
    0.02822391 = weight(_text_:to in 5665) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02822391 = score(doc=5665,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.34088457 = fieldWeight in 5665, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5665)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

In its role as a national bibliographic agency, the Bibliografia Nazionale Italiana (BNI) has never been in a position to fulfill what should be one of its main functions: authority control. Despite the creation of various committees, studies, and projects, and the close relationship between the BNI and the Servizio Bibliotecario Nazionale (SBN), no plan of action with regard to authority control, whether shared or developed in consultation, has been produced to date. Recently, a significant result was achieved: the specification of the new BNI/UNIMARC database, structured according to authority control principles. And in collaboration with the Region of Tuscany, a project for control of access points destined for the users and librarians of that region is in progress, providing the opportunity to initiate the systematic control of BNI access points. The BNI is now in a position to begin to realize the first objective recommended by the IFLA Working Group on an International Authority System more than twenty years ago: to establish authority headings, including cross-references, for its bibliographic records.

0.0087653585 = product of:
  0.026296074 = sum of:
    0.026296074 = weight(_text_:to in 2506) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026296074 = score(doc=2506,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.31760043 = fieldWeight in 2506, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2506)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Content

This paper looks at approaches to name authority control in repository contexts and describes the work of the Names project, which has been funded to investigate issues surrounding the identification of individuals and institutions within repositories of research outputs in the United Kingdom. The problem of uniquely identifying authors has been with us ever since books have been catalogued. National libraries have been creating name authority files for authors of books for many years, starting with card catalogues and now maintaining electronic files in MARC format. However, authority files for the creators of journal articles do not tend to exist in library systems. The increasing use of subject-based and institutional repositories to hold working papers, reports, research data, and pre-refereed and post-referred versions of articles has led to a corresponding rise in the number of authors identified in such systems. Without having a means of uniquely and unambiguously identifying the creators of materials in repositories, it becomes difficult to be sure whether all the materials related to a particular author will be correctly associated with that individual. Names of authors may be entered in more than one way, or more than one author may have exactly the same name. This article looks at recent attempts to address this problem in the repository environment and goes on to explain the approach that is planned to be taken in the Names project.

0.0077611795 = product of:
  0.023283537 = sum of:
    0.023283537 = weight(_text_:to in 5655) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023283537 = score(doc=5655,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.28121543 = fieldWeight in 5655, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5655)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Authority control is necessary for meeting the catalog's objectives of enabling users to find the works of an author and to collocate all works of a person or corporate body. This article looks at the current state of authority control as compared to the visions of the 1979 LITA (Library Information and Technology Association) Institutes and the 1984 Authority Control Interest Group. It explores a new view of IFLA's Universal Bibliographic Control (UBC) and a future vision of a virtual international authority file as a building block for the Semantic Web and reinforces the importance of authority control to improve the precision of searches of large databases or the Internet.

0.0077611795 = product of:
  0.023283537 = sum of:
    0.023283537 = weight(_text_:to in 5661) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023283537 = score(doc=5661,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.28121543 = fieldWeight in 5661, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5661)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Discusses the work of the IFLA Working Group of Functional Requirements and Numbering of Authority Records. Describes the activities of the group to build liaison relationships with other sectors of the information community that create and maintain data which is similar to library authority files. Provides a description of the entity-relationship model being developed by the Working Group to extend the FRBR model to cover authority data. (Note: Readers should be aware that the Working Group's entity-relationship model has changed considerably since this paper was written in December 2002.)

0.0061980444 = product of:
  0.018594133 = sum of:
    0.018594133 = weight(_text_:to in 5669) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018594133 = score(doc=5669,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.22457743 = fieldWeight in 5669, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5669)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Today's electronic catalogue makes retrieval of specific records very simple and quick in most (not all) cases, but searches aimed at the reliable retrieval of all material answering a well-defined need (author, work, theme, form, etc.) are still long and tiring, and sometimes impossible, in crowded bibliographic databases. In spite of its great relevance, authority control has been and still is the "poor relative" of cataloguing, the often neglected or overlooked "other half" if we compare it to the creation of bibliographic records. The FRBR study and the new authority control standards (GARR and UNIMARC Authorities) are important steps towards future perspectives. Even today, cataloguing codes do not make clear the difference between the access points for bibliographic records and the relationships (work-to-work, author-to-work, etc.) that are independent from spoecific publications. With the development of richer authority records and relationships, the bibliographic record might be relieved of information related to entities different from publications and of all the functions more suitably worked out upstream or downstream in access systems or by links to the images and/or the texts of the publications themselves. A "light" bibliographic record would no longer be the paramount component of library information systems; it would keep its central role rather as nimble, swift turntable between access and content organization systems and systems for management and display of digital resources themselves.

0.005141828 = product of:
  0.015425485 = sum of:
    0.015425485 = product of:
      0.03085097 = sum of:
        0.03085097 = weight(_text_:22 in 3041) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03085097 = score(doc=3041,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15947726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045541126 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3041, 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=3041)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

22. 8.2009 13:11:01

0.0048009846 = product of:
  0.014402954 = sum of:
    0.014402954 = weight(_text_:to in 5678) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014402954 = score(doc=5678,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.17395693 = fieldWeight in 5678, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5678)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Explicit authority control of works is essentially non-existent. Our catalogs are built on a principle of controlling headings, and primarily headings for names of authors. Our syndetic structure creates a spider's web of networked relationships among forms of headings, but it ends there, despite the potential richness of depth among bibliographic entities. Effective authority control of works could yield richness in the catalog that would enhance retrieval capabilities. Works are considered to constitute the intellectual content of informative artifacts that may be collected and ordered for retrieval. In a 1992 study the author examined a random sample of works drawn from the catalog of the Georgetown University Library. For each progenitor work, an instantiation network (also referred to as a bibliographic family) was constituted. A detailed analysis of the linkages that would be required for authority control of these networks is reviewed here. A new study is also presented, in which Library of Congress authority records for the works in this sample are sought and analyzed. Results demonstrate a near total lack of control, with only 5.6% of works for which authority records were found. From a sample of 410 works, of which nearly half have instantiation networks, only 23 works could be said to have implicit authority control. However, many instantiation networks are made up of successive derivations that can be implicitly linked through collocation. The difficult work of explicitly linking instantiations comes with title changes, translations, and containing relations. The empirical evidence in the present study suggests that explicit control of expressions will provide the best control over instantiation networks because it is instantiations such as translations, abridgments, and adaptations that require explicit linking.

0.004703985 = product of:
  0.014111955 = sum of:
    0.014111955 = weight(_text_:to in 5662) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014111955 = score(doc=5662,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.17044228 = fieldWeight in 5662, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5662)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Defines authority control and vocabulary control and their place and utility in modern cataloguing. Discusses authority records and authority files and the use and purposes of each. Describes the creation of authority records and the sources from which authority data is collected. Discusses "metadata" schemes and their manifold and manifest inadequacies; points out the relationship of the Dublin Core to the MARC family of standards and the fact that both are framework standards-the first simplistic and naïve, the second complex and nuanced. Defines precision and recall as desiderata in indexing and retrieval schemes and relates them to authority control in catalogues. Discusses the problems involved in cataloguing electronic documents and resources and proposes an international program under the Universal Bibliographic Control (UBC) umbrella, using an international code of descriptive cataloguing, and based on an international name authority file. Calls for urgent action on these proposals.

0.0044349595 = product of:
  0.013304878 = sum of:
    0.013304878 = weight(_text_:to in 5556) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013304878 = score(doc=5556,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.16069452 = fieldWeight in 5556, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5556)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Italy's ICCU (Istituto Centrale per il Catalogo Unico) is coordinating a national effort to build a shared online authority file through the National Library Service (SBN). The status of that project and the implications of maintaining such a resource are described.

0.0036358216 = product of:
  0.010907465 = sum of:
    0.010907465 = product of:
      0.02181493 = sum of:
        0.02181493 = weight(_text_:22 in 632) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02181493 = score(doc=632,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15947726 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045541126 = queryNorm
            0.13679022 = fieldWeight in 632, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=632)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Content

MARC21 als Austauschformat Die Expertengruppe Datenformate hat in ihrer 5. Sitzung am 22. November 2005 die Frage der Hierarchienabbildung bei der Übernahme von MARC 21 weiter diskutiert und einer Lösung zugeführt. Für einen geringen Prozentsatz der Daten werden trotz Vorarbeiten der Expertengruppe Probleme bei der Überführung von MARC-21-Daten in MAB2-Strukturen gesehen. Es wurde darauf hingewiesen, dass es im Zusammenhang mit dem Umstieg auf MARC 21 ebenso wie bei der kooperativen Katalogisierung notwendig ist, gemeinsame Regeln festzulegen und Absprachen zwischen den Verbünden zu treffen. Eine unterschiedliche Handhabung des Formats sollte sich von vornherein verbieten. Projekt Kooperative Neukatalogisierung Die Projektgruppe hat zweimal getagt, zuletzt am 3. November 2005. Es liegen erste Ergebnisse vor, und spätestens Anfang Januar 2006 soll das Verfahren erprobt werden. Alle Verbünde signalisieren ihr Interesse an dem geplanten Verfahren, da die Eigenkatalogisierungsrate nach wie vor zu hoch ist. Für die Akzeptanz des Dienstes, der auch zum Synchronisieren der vorhandenen Aufnahmen und zum Austausch von Sacherschließungsdaten genutzt werden soll, ist die Aktualität des geplanten Neukatalogisierungspools essentiell. Ein weiteres Ziel ist auch die Optimierung der Arbeitsabläufe zwischen Verbundzentrale und Bibliotheken. Catalogue Enrichment Zur Anreicherung der Katalogdaten gibt es verschiedene Aktivitäten innerhalb der Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Verbundsysteme, die koordiniert werden müssen, damit eine Mehrfachdigitalisierung von Inhaltsverzeichnissen, Abstracts und anderen Objekten vermieden werden kann. Die Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Verbundsysteme beschließt, eine kleine Arbeitsgruppe einzusetzen, die bis spätestens Anfang Februar 2006 einen Vorschlag mit unterschiedlichen Szenarien für unterschiedliche Umgebungen vorlegen soll. Aufgabe der AG Datenanreicherung ist die Konzeption eines schnellen Dienstes für die Digitalisierung von Abstracts und Inhaltsverzeichnissen sofern sie lizenzrechtlich frei verfügbar sind, die allen Verbünden zur Verfügung gestellt werden sollen. Dazu gehören eine Übersicht über die vorhandenen Daten und eine ausgearbeitete Verfahrensvorschrift für das künftige Vorgehen.
DDC/Melvil-Nutzungs- und Lizenzsituation Die Deutsche Bibliothek hat den Dienst Melvil vorgestellt, der auf der im Rahmen des Projektes DDC Deutsch erstellten deutschen Übersetzung der 22. Ausgabe der DDC basiert, und die Such- und Sprachgewohnheiten deutschsprachiger Benutzerinnen und Benutzer berücksichtigt. Mit Melvil wurde ein Online-Dienst entwickelt, der Bibliotheken und Informationseinrichtungen außer einem an WebDewey orientierten Klassifikationstool MelvilClass auch ein Retrievaltool MelvilSearch für die verbale Suche nach DDC-erschlossenen Dokumenten und das Browsing in der DDC-Hierarchie zur Verfügung stellt. Über die Schnittstelle MelvilSoap können Bibliotheken und Verbundzentralen, die den Dienst Melvil lizenziert haben, auch DDC-Daten zur weiteren Nutzung herunterladen. Gegenwärtig vergibt Die Deutsche Bibliothek Testlizenzen, ab 2006 kann der Dienst nach einem gestaffelten Modell kostenpflichtig genutzt werden Ergebnisse der Adhoc-Arbeitsgruppe ISBD(CR) Der Standardisierungsausschuss hatte in seiner 9. Sitzung am 15. Dezember 2004 die Anpassung der Splitregeln bei fortlaufenden Sammelwerken an die ISBD(CR) mit dem Ziel der Übernahme beschlossen. Im Januar 2005 richtete die Arbeitsstelle für Standardisierung eine Ad-hoc-AG ISBD(CR) ein, in der Vertreter der ZDB, der Expertengruppe Formalerschließung und der AGDBT (Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Datenbankteilnehmer der ZDB) unter der Federführung der Arbeitsstelle für Standardisierung zusammenarbeiteten. Auftragsgemäß konnte dem Standardisierungsausschuss am 2. August 2005 ein entscheidungsreifer Entwurf zur Anwendung der ISBD(CR)-Splitregeln für fortlaufende Sammelwerke vorgelegt werden. Die Unterlage, die dem Standardisierungsausschuss zu seiner 11. Sitzung am 1. Dezember 2005 zugeleitet wurde, wurde den Mitgliedern der Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Verbundsysteme im Vorfeld der Sitzung zur Kenntnis gegeben. Die zeitnahe Anwendung der ISBD(CR)-Splitregeln würde nicht nur in einem kleinen abgeschlossenen Bereich eine Angleichung an internationale Gepflogenheiten bedeuten, sondern sie hätte auch einige positive Auswirkungen auf die von Zeitschriftentiteln abhängigen ergänzenden Dienstleistungen. So würde z.B. die Verlinkung mit SFX-Diensten erheblich erleichtert."

0.0013859249 = product of:
  0.0041577746 = sum of:
    0.0041577746 = weight(_text_:to in 2317) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0041577746 = score(doc=2317,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08279609 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.045541126 = queryNorm
        0.05021704 = fieldWeight in 2317, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.818051 = idf(docFreq=19512, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=2317)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Content

Am Programm für den nächsten Weltkongress arbeitet der Ständige Ausschuss bereits. Es steht unter dem Motto "Foundations to Build Future Subject Access". Geplant ist auch eine Satellitenkonferenz, die am 20. und 21. August 2009 in Florenz unter dem Titel "Past Lessons, Future Challenges in Subject Access" stattfindet, zu der alle an Klassifikationen und Indexierungsprozessen Interessierte herzlich eingeladen sind. Die Arbeitsgruppen der Sektion trafen sich in Quebec, konnten jedoch bislang keine abschließenden Ergebnisse vorlegen. So sind bisher weder die Richtlinien für multilinguale Thesauri redigiert und publiziert, noch ist mit dem Erscheinen der Richtlinien für Sacherschließungsdaten in Nationalbibliografien vor 2009 zu rechnen. Die Teilnehmer verständigten sich darauf, dass die Weiterarbeit an einem multilingualen Wörterbuch zur Katalogisierung im Zeitalter von FRBR und RDA wichtiger denn je ist. Nach dem Release der neuen IFLA-Website soll dieses Online-Nachschlagewerk auf den Webseiten eine Heimat finden und wartet auf die Mitarbeit von Katalogisierern aus aller Welt. Die Arbeitsgruppe zu den Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Records (FRSAR) traf sich 2008 mehrfach und stellte zuletzt während der Konferenz der International Society of Knowledge Organization (ISKO) in Montreal ihre Arbeitsergebnisse zur Diskussion. Leider sind keine aktuellen Papiere zu den FRSAR online verfügbar. Ein internationales Stellungnahmeverfahren zu dem Modell zu Katalogisaten von Themen von Werken im Rahmen des FRBR-Modells kann jedoch 2009 erwartet werden. Mehr Informationen dazu gibt es z.B. in der neuen Publikation "New Perspectives on Subject Indexing and Classification", einer Gedenkschrift für die verstorbene Kollegin und ehemaliges Mitglied des Ständigen Ausschusses, Magda Heiner-Freiling. Die Idee dazu entstand während des IFLA-Kongresses in Durban. Dank der zahlreichen Beitragenden aus aller Welt gelang es, im Laufe des vergangenen Jahres eine interessante Sammlung rund um die Themen DDC, verbale Sacherschließung, Terminologiearbeit und multilinguale sachliche Suchen zusammenzustellen.