Search (99 results, page 1 of 5)

0.025687214 = product of:
  0.102748856 = sum of:
    0.102748856 = weight(_text_:digitale in 1032) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.102748856 = score(doc=1032,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.18027179 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.158747 = idf(docFreq=690, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.5699664 = fieldWeight in 1032, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          5.158747 = idf(docFreq=690, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1032)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Content

Darin: "Um als Bibliothek überhaupt eine Rolle in der mobil-digitalen Welt spielen zu können, sollten zuerst die dafür notwendigen Rahmenbedienungen geschaffen werden. Dies betrifft zum einen die Aus- und Weiterbildung aller Bibliotheksmitarbeiter. Brauchen wirklich alle Bibliotheksrnitarbeiter Kenntnisse in RAK? Warum lernen sie nicht, wie man eine App downloaded, wie E-Book-Reader funktionieren oder wie man eine digitale Strategie umsetzt? Zum anderen brauchen endlich alle Bibliotheksmitarbeiter einen wirklich freien Internetzugang. Des Weiteren: Smartphones, EBook-Reader und Tablet-PC's zurn Ausprobieren sollten in jeder Bibliothek vorhanden sein. Kostenloses WLAN für alle in der Bibliothek sollte Standard sein. Für das Ausprobieren mobiler Plattformen und Angebote müssen die zeitlichen Ressourcen geschaffen werden. Workshops und Schulungen können ein guter Start sein. Die digitale Welt verändert sich aber so rasant, dass es notwendig sein wird, sich selber stetig weiterzubilden."

Series

Lesesaal: Mobile digitale Angebote: Kommentar

0.010274886 = product of:
  0.041099545 = sum of:
    0.041099545 = weight(_text_:digitale in 2839) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.041099545 = score(doc=2839,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18027179 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.158747 = idf(docFreq=690, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.22798656 = fieldWeight in 2839, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.158747 = idf(docFreq=690, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2839)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Das internationale ORCID-Konsortium vernetzt Publizierende mit ihren Aufsätzen und Forschungsdaten über eine eindeutige ID. Weltweit besitzen bereits über 2 Millionen Forschende eine solche Kennung. Um ORCID in Deutschland zu fördern, wurde das Projektvorhaben "ORCID DE - Förderung der Open Researcher and Contributor ID in Deutschland" gebildet. Die Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) hat die Förderung des auf drei Jahre angelegten Projekts im Februar 2016 bewilligt. Durch die Integration in über 230 digitale Informationsinfrastrukturen erleichtert die Open Researcher and Contributor ID, kurz ORCID, die Pflege der Publikationsliste für Forscherinnen und Forscher. Die Idee dahinter ist folgende: Jede Person, die im wissenschaftlichen Arbeitsprozess einen Beitrag leistet, kann sich über die eindeutige ORCID-Kennung mit ihren Publikationen, Forschungsdaten und anderen Produkten des Forschungsprozesses (zum Beispiel Software) eindeutig vernetzen. Damit werden diese Objekte sichtbar und technisch verlässlich mit ihren Erschafferinnen und Erschaffern verbunden. ORCID bietet das Potenzial, bisher verteilte Informationen standardisiert zusammenzuführen und damit einen Überblick auf die Forschungsleistung von Forschenden zu ermöglichen. Durch die Offenheit des Systems und des großen internationalen Konsortiums ist ORCID auf dem Weg, ein langfristig gültiger Identifikator im wissenschaftlichen Alltag zu werden.

0.0042066295 = product of:
  0.016826518 = sum of:
    0.016826518 = weight(_text_:information in 2988) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016826518 = score(doc=2988,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.27429342 = fieldWeight in 2988, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2988)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Re:inventing information science in the networked society: Proceedings of the 14th International Symposium on Information Science, Zadar/Croatia, 19th-21st May 2015. Eds.: F. Pehar, C. Schloegl u. C. Wolff

0.0042066295 = product of:
  0.016826518 = sum of:
    0.016826518 = weight(_text_:information in 2989) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016826518 = score(doc=2989,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.27429342 = fieldWeight in 2989, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2989)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Re:inventing information science in the networked society: Proceedings of the 14th International Symposium on Information Science, Zadar/Croatia, 19th-21st May 2015. Eds.: F. Pehar, C. Schloegl u. C. Wolff

0.0042066295 = product of:
  0.016826518 = sum of:
    0.016826518 = weight(_text_:information in 2990) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016826518 = score(doc=2990,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.27429342 = fieldWeight in 2990, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2990)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Re:inventing information science in the networked society: Proceedings of the 14th International Symposium on Information Science, Zadar/Croatia, 19th-21st May 2015. Eds.: F. Pehar, C. Schloegl u. C. Wolff

0.0042066295 = product of:
  0.016826518 = sum of:
    0.016826518 = weight(_text_:information in 2997) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016826518 = score(doc=2997,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.27429342 = fieldWeight in 2997, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2997)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Re:inventing information science in the networked society: Proceedings of the 14th International Symposium on Information Science, Zadar/Croatia, 19th-21st May 2015. Eds.: F. Pehar, C. Schloegl u. C. Wolff

0.004164351 = product of:
  0.016657405 = sum of:
    0.016657405 = weight(_text_:information in 1878) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016657405 = score(doc=1878,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.27153665 = fieldWeight in 1878, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1878)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The quality of large catalogs is uneven and often low, but this issue is underrated and understudied. Library catalogs often fail to communicate correct and clear information to users and their low quality is not simply due to faults, duplications, and so on but also to unwise cataloging standards and policies. While there is plenty of uncontrolled information about books and other publications, the need for good-quality bibliographic information is apparent and library catalogs may provide a trustworthy map of the publishing output, with full control of editions, works, authors, and so on and effective navigation functions, which are lacking in today's information-rich environment.

0.004164351 = product of:
  0.016657405 = sum of:
    0.016657405 = weight(_text_:information in 1890) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016657405 = score(doc=1890,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.27153665 = fieldWeight in 1890, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1890)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Library catalogs do not provide catalog users with the assistance they need to easily and confidently select the person they are interested in. Examples are provided of Web services that do a better job of helping information seekers differentiate the person they are seeking from those with similar names. Some of the reasons for this failure in library catalogs are examined. This article then looks at how much information is necessary to help users disambiguate names, how that information could be captured and shared, and some ways the information could be displayed in library catalogs.

0.003606434 = product of:
  0.014425736 = sum of:
    0.014425736 = weight(_text_:information in 1899) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014425736 = score(doc=1899,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.23515764 = fieldWeight in 1899, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1899)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Dominican University's Graduate School of Library and Information Science (GSLIS) was one of a funnel group of graduate schools of library and information science selected to test RDA. A seminar specifically for this purpose was conducted from August to December 2010. Fifteen students participated in the test, creating records in AACR2 and in RDA, encoding them in the MARC format, and responding to the required questionnaires. In addition to record creation, the students were also asked to submit a final paper in which they described their experiences and recommended whether or not to accept RDA as a replacement for AACR2.

0.003606434 = product of:
  0.014425736 = sum of:
    0.014425736 = weight(_text_:information in 1980) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014425736 = score(doc=1980,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.23515764 = fieldWeight in 1980, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1980)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Discussions of cataloging and metadata education are popular in social media outlets, scholarly literature, conference meetings, and so on. This article, the third installment of a longitudinal study on the state of information organization (IO) education, analyzes the recent literature to identify new and continuing themes related to IO education. It provides an overview of the curricula of the 58 library and information science graduate programs in the United States and Canada accredited by the American Library Association (ALA). It examines the current conditions in 2012-2013 and compares them to data from earlier studies. It provides an overview of the types of IO courses available, program requirements, the number of schools offering IO courses, and the number of schools teaching those courses.

0.0033256328 = product of:
  0.013302531 = sum of:
    0.013302531 = weight(_text_:information in 2879) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013302531 = score(doc=2879,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.21684799 = fieldWeight in 2879, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2879)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Purpose - Despite the importance of bibliographic information systems for discovering and exploring library resources, some of the core functionality that should be provided to support users in their information seeking process is still missing. Investigating these issues, the purpose of this paper is to design a solution that would fulfil the missing objectives. Design/methodology/approach - Building on the concepts of a work family, functional requirements for bibliographic records (FRBR) and information visualization, the paper proposes a model and user interface design that could support a more efficient and user-friendly presentation and navigation in bibliographic information systems. Findings - The proposed design brings together all versions of a work, related works, and other works by and about the author and shows how the model was implemented into a FrbrVis prototype system using hierarchical visualization layout. Research limitations/implications - Although issues related to discovery and exploration apply to various material types, the research first focused on works of fiction and was also limited by the selected sample of records. Practical implications - The model for presenting and interacting with FRBR-based data can serve as a good starting point for future developments and implementations. Originality/value - With FRBR concepts being gradually integrated into cataloguing rules, formats, and various bibliographic services, one of the important questions that has not really been investigated and studied is how the new type of data would be presented to users in a way that would exploit the true potential of the changes.

0.0033256328 = product of:
  0.013302531 = sum of:
    0.013302531 = weight(_text_:information in 3350) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013302531 = score(doc=3350,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.21684799 = fieldWeight in 3350, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3350)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Since their beginnings, bibliographic information systems have been displaying results in the form of long, textual lists. With the development of new data models and computer technologies, the need for new approaches to present and interact with bibliographic data has slowly been maturing. To investigate how this could be accomplished, a prototype system, FrbrVis1, was designed to present work families within a bibliographic information system using information visualization. This paper reports on two user studies, a controlled and an observational experiment, that have been carried out to assess the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR)-based against an existing system as well as to test four different hierarchical visual layouts. The results clearly show that FrbrVis offers better performance and user experience compared to the baseline system. The differences between the four hierarchical visualizations (Indented tree, Radial tree, Circlepack, and Sunburst) were, on the other hand, not as pronounced, but the Indented tree and Sunburst design proved to be the most successful, both in performance as well as user perception. The paper therefore not only evaluates the application of a visual presentation of bibliographic work families, but also provides valuable results regarding the performance and user acceptance of individual hierarchical visualization techniques.

Source

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 68(2017) no.2, S.392-411

0.003091229 = product of:
  0.012364916 = sum of:
    0.012364916 = weight(_text_:information in 4199) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012364916 = score(doc=4199,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.20156369 = fieldWeight in 4199, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4199)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Educational standards are a central focus of the current educational system in the United States, underpinning educational practice, curriculum design, teacher professional development, and high-stakes testing and assessment. Digital library users have requested that this information be accessible in association with digital learning resources to support teaching and learning as well as accountability requirements. Providing this information is complex because of the variability and number of standards documents in use at the national, state, and local level. This article describes a cataloging tool that aids catalogers in the assignment of standards metadata to digital library resources, using natural language processing techniques. The research explores whether the standards suggestor service would suggest the same standards as a human, whether relevant standards are ranked appropriately in the result set, and whether the relevance of the suggested assignments improve when, in addition to resource content, metadata is included in the query to the cataloging tool. The article also discusses how this service might streamline the cataloging workflow.

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 62(2011) no.2, S.395-405

0.003091229 = product of:
  0.012364916 = sum of:
    0.012364916 = weight(_text_:information in 2624) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012364916 = score(doc=2624,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.20156369 = fieldWeight in 2624, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2624)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The article presents the work of Elaine Svenonius The Intellectual Foundation of Information Organization, translated in Italian and published by Le Lettere of Florence, within the series Pinakes, with the title Il fondamento intellettuale dell'organizzazione dell'informazione. The Intellectual Foundation of Information Organization defines the theoretical aspects of library science, its philosophical basics and principles, the purposes that must be kept in mind, abstracting from the technology used in a library. The book deals with information organization and bibliographic universe, in particular using the bibliographic entities defined in FRBR, at first. Then, it analyzes all the specific languages by which works and subjects are treated. This work, already acknowledged as a classic, organizes, synthesizes and make easily understood the whole complex of knowledge, practices and procedures developed in the last 150 years.

0.0029745363 = product of:
  0.011898145 = sum of:
    0.011898145 = weight(_text_:information in 677) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011898145 = score(doc=677,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.19395474 = fieldWeight in 677, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=677)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Resource Description & Access (RDA) is intended to provide a flexible and extensible framework that can accommodate all types of content and media within rapidly evolving digital environments while also maintaining compatibility with the Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules, 2nd edition (AACR2). The cataloging community is grappling with practical issues in navigating the transition from AACR2 to RDA; there is a definite need to evaluate major subject areas and broader themes in information organization under the new RDA paradigm. This article aims to accomplish this task through a thorough and critical review of the emerging RDA literature published from 2005 to 2011. The review mostly concerns key areas of difference between RDA and AACR2, the relationship of the new cataloging code to metadata standards, the impact on encoding standards such as Machine-Readable Cataloging (MARC), end user considerations, and practitioners' views on RDA implementation and training. Future research will require more in-depth studies of RDA's expected benefits and the manner in which the new cataloging code will improve resource retrieval and bibliographic control for users and catalogers alike over AACR2. The question as to how the cataloging community can best move forward to the post-AACR2/MARC environment must be addressed carefully so as to chart the future of bibliographic control in the evolving environment of information production, management, and use.

Series

Advances in information science

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64(2013) no.4, S.651-662

0.0029745363 = product of:
  0.011898145 = sum of:
    0.011898145 = weight(_text_:information in 5533) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011898145 = score(doc=5533,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.19395474 = fieldWeight in 5533, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5533)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Following from approaches that view information as documentary forms of specific communicative practices, this paper uses theoretical concepts derived from cultural theory to examine the concept of work in Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) in relation to authorship, the ur-text, and intertextuality. Historically, the practice of librarianship has existed on a foundation of standards, and among the earliest of the standards is the Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules (AACR). The basis of this set of standards is materialist: the object of scrutiny is the document, and the document, whatever its specific form, is considered to possess materiality. This paper argues that unlike the AACR, FRBR lays bare its own ideological underpinnings, and in so doing, it dematerializes the text and mystifies the creative process. At the same time, it has really been with the development of FRBR and linked-data models that library and information science has considered intertextual analysis at the level of the document rather than at a more abstract level. The idealism that underpins FRBR's notion of work points to intertextuality, with all its potential for rich analysis, but at the same time embeds deep in its system the logocentrism of the ideal signified-another example of disciplining epistemology. The paper will examine these two interlinked themes through discussion of FRBR and the strange case of the vanishing text, the ur-text, and intertextuality.

Content

Beitrag in einem Themenheft: 'Exploring Philosophies of Information'.

0.0029446408 = product of:
  0.011778563 = sum of:
    0.011778563 = weight(_text_:information in 174) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011778563 = score(doc=174,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.1920054 = fieldWeight in 174, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=174)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.0029446408 = product of:
  0.011778563 = sum of:
    0.011778563 = weight(_text_:information in 1925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011778563 = score(doc=1925,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.1920054 = fieldWeight in 1925, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1925)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

A research project was conducted in which proper JAPAN/MARC bibliographic records for 158 major Japanese classical works were identified manually, since existing records contain little information about works included in the resources. This paper reports the detailed method used for work identification, including selecting works, obtaining the bibliographic records to be judged, and building the judgment criteria. The results of the work identification process are reported along with average numbers that indicate the characteristics of certain classics. The necessity of manual identification was justified through an evaluation of searches by author and/or title information in a conventional retrieval system.

0.0029446408 = product of:
  0.011778563 = sum of:
    0.011778563 = weight(_text_:information in 1946) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011778563 = score(doc=1946,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.1920054 = fieldWeight in 1946, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1946)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The implementation of Resource Description and Access (RDA) in 2013 or after will have a powerful impact on the skill set required of new library and information science professionals. This article chronicles the development of an RDA "boot camp" at UNC-Chapel Hill's School of Information and Library Science. Curriculum for the three-hour camp included a review of relevant theoretical frameworks and a hands-on exercise creating RDA records. Findings from a post-boot camp survey point to areas for further growth in cataloging and metadata course development and suggest that students are eager for more practical experience with emerging schema.

0.0029446408 = product of:
  0.011778563 = sum of:
    0.011778563 = weight(_text_:information in 2001) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011778563 = score(doc=2001,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06134496 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.034944877 = queryNorm
        0.1920054 = fieldWeight in 2001, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2001)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Libraries are faced with an epochal transformation: the emergence of a new structure of the web, the Semantic Web. The data structure will change completely in the next few years, leading to profound changes in information organization and retrieval. In this article I compare International Standard for Bibliographic Description (ISBD) and Regole italiane di catalogazione (REICAT), the new Italian cataloging rules, to see when confronted with this phenomenon, how ready they are to structure bibliographic data in new ways to support information retrieval.