Search (66 results, page 1 of 4)

  • × theme_ss:"Formalerschließung"
  • × type_ss:"a"
  • × year_i:[2010 TO 2020}
  1. Beall, J.: Abbreviations, full spellings, and searchers' preferences (2011) 0.08 
    0.08405279 = product of:
  0.16810559 = sum of:
    0.105578996 = weight(_text_:search in 4166) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.105578996 = score(doc=4166,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.6144187 = fieldWeight in 4166, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4166)
    0.06252659 = product of:
      0.12505318 = sum of:
        0.12505318 = weight(_text_:engine in 4166) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.12505318 = score(doc=4166,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.26447627 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.47283328 = fieldWeight in 4166, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4166)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    This study examined ten, selected word pairs, each containing a word's full spelling and its abbreviation, to determine which form search engine users preferred in searching. Using seven search logs gathered from several Internet search engines with approximately 608 MB of data, the study measured the occurrences of the twenty terms. The selected words are important in library cataloging, for some are prescribed abbreviations in metadata content standards. The study found that in eight of the ten word pairs users preferred to search full spellings over the abbreviations, often by a high margin.'
  2. Wakeling, S.; Clough, P.; Connaway, L.S.; Sen, B.; Tomás, D.: Users and uses of a global union catalog : a mixed-methods study of WorldCat.org (2017) 0.06 
    0.056206264 = product of:
  0.11241253 = sum of:
    0.057146307 = weight(_text_:search in 3794) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.057146307 = score(doc=3794,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.33256388 = fieldWeight in 3794, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3794)
    0.05526622 = product of:
      0.11053244 = sum of:
        0.11053244 = weight(_text_:engine in 3794) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11053244 = score(doc=3794,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.26447627 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.41792953 = fieldWeight in 3794, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3794)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    This paper presents the first large-scale investigation of the users and uses of WorldCat.org, the world's largest bibliographic database and global union catalog. Using a mixed-methods approach involving focus group interviews with 120 participants, an online survey with 2,918 responses, and an analysis of transaction logs of approximately 15 million sessions from WorldCat.org, the study provides a new understanding of the context for global union catalog use. We find that WorldCat.org is accessed by a diverse population, with the three primary user groups being librarians, students, and academics. Use of the system is found to fall within three broad types of work-task (professional, academic, and leisure), and we also present an emergent taxonomy of search tasks that encompass known-item, unknown-item, and institutional information searches. Our results support the notion that union catalogs are primarily used for known-item searches, although the volume of traffic to WorldCat.org means that unknown-item searches nonetheless represent an estimated 250,000 sessions per month. Search engine referrals account for almost half of all traffic, but although WorldCat.org effectively connects users referred from institutional library catalogs to other libraries holding a sought item, users arriving from a search engine are less likely to connect to a library.
  3. Forero, D.; Peterson, N.; Hamilton, A.: Building an institutional author search tool (2019) 0.04 
    0.043457236 = product of:
  0.08691447 = sum of:
    0.04072366 = weight(_text_:web in 5441) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04072366 = score(doc=5441,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.25239927 = fieldWeight in 5441, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5441)
    0.046190813 = weight(_text_:search in 5441) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.046190813 = score(doc=5441,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.2688082 = fieldWeight in 5441, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5441)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Ability to collect time-specific lists of faculty publications has become increasingly important for academic departments. At OHSU publication lists had been retrieved manually by a librarian who conducted literature searches in bibliographic databases. These searches were complicated and time consuming, and the results were large and difficult to assess for accuracy. The OHSU library has built an open web page that allows novices to make very sophisticated institution-specific queries. The tool frees up library staff, provides users with an easy way of retrieving reliable local publication information from PubMed, and gives an opportunity for more sophisticated users to modify the algorithm or dive into the data to better understand nuances from a strong jumping off point.
  4. Xu, A.; Hess, K.; Akerman, L.: From MARC to BIBFRAME 2.0 : Crosswalks (2018) 0.04 
    0.03706527 = product of:
  0.07413054 = sum of:
    0.041137107 = weight(_text_:web in 5172) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.041137107 = score(doc=5172,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.25496176 = fieldWeight in 5172, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5172)
    0.032993436 = weight(_text_:search in 5172) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.032993436 = score(doc=5172,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.19200584 = fieldWeight in 5172, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5172)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    One of the big challenges facing academic libraries today is to increase the relevance of the libraries to their user communities. If the libraries can increase the visibility of their resources on the open web, it will increase the chances of the libraries to reach to their user communities via the user's first search experience. BIBFRAME and library Linked Data will enable libraries to publish their resources in a way that the Web understands, consume Linked Data to enrich their resources relevant to the libraries' user communities, and visualize networks across collections. However, one of the important steps for transitioning to BIBFRAME and library Linked Data involves crosswalks, mapping MARC fields and subfields across data models and performing necessary data reformatting to be in compliance with the specifications of the new model, which is currently BIBFRAME 2.0. This article looks into how the Library of Congress has mapped library bibliographic data from the MARC format to the BIBFRAME 2.0 model and vocabulary published and updated since April 2016, available from http://www.loc.gov/bibframe/docs/index.html based on the recently released conversion specifications and converter, developed by the Library of Congress with input from many community members. The BIBFRAME 2.0 standard and conversion tools will enable libraries to transform bibliographic data from MARC into BIBFRAME 2.0, which introduces a Linked Data model as the improved method of bibliographic control for the future, and make bibliographic information more useful within and beyond library communities.
  5. Martínez-Ávila, D.; Smiraglia, R.; Lee, H.-L.; Fox, M.: What is an author now? (2015) 0.03 
    0.03429555 = product of:
  0.0685911 = sum of:
    0.03732781 = weight(_text_:search in 2321) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03732781 = score(doc=2321,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.21722981 = fieldWeight in 2321, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2321)
    0.031263296 = product of:
      0.06252659 = sum of:
        0.06252659 = weight(_text_:engine in 2321) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06252659 = score(doc=2321,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.26447627 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.23641664 = fieldWeight in 2321, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2321)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to discuss and shed light on the following questions: What is an author? Is it a person who writes? Or, is it, in information, an iconic taxonomic designation (some might say a "classification") for a group of writings that are recognized by the public in some particular way? What does it mean when a search engine, or catalog, asks a user to enter the name of an author? And how does that accord with the manner in which the data have been entered in association with the names of the entities identified with the concept of authorship? Design/methodology/approach - The authors use several cases as bases of phenomenological discourse analysis, combining as best the authors can components of eidetic bracketing (a Husserlian technique for isolating noetic reduction) with Foucauldian discourse analysis. The two approaches are not sympathetic or together cogent, so the authors present them instead as alternative explanations alongside empirical evidence. In this way the authors are able to isolate components of iconic "authorship" and then subsequently engage them in discourse. Findings - An "author" is an iconic name associated with a class of works. An "author" is a role in public discourse between a set of works and the culture that consumes them. An "author" is a role in cultural sublimation, or a power broker in deabstemiation. An "author" is last, if ever, a person responsible for the intellectual content of a published work. The library catalog's attribution of "author" is at odds with the Foucauldian discursive comprehension of the role of an "author." Originality/value - One of the main assets of this paper is the combination of Foucauldian discourse analysis with phenomenological analysis for the study of the "author." The authors turned to Foucauldian discourse analysis to discover the loci of power in the interactions of the public with the named authorial entities. The authors also looked to phenomenological analysis to consider the lived experience of users who encounter the same named authorial entities. The study of the "author" in this combined way facilitated the revelation of new aspects of the role of authorship in search engines and library catalogs.
  6. Chambers, S.; Myall, C.: Cataloging and classification : review of the literature 2007-8 (2010) 0.03 
    0.032083966 = product of:
  0.06416793 = sum of:
    0.04072366 = weight(_text_:web in 4309) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04072366 = score(doc=4309,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.25239927 = fieldWeight in 4309, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4309)
    0.023444273 = product of:
      0.046888545 = sum of:
        0.046888545 = weight(_text_:22 in 4309) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.046888545 = score(doc=4309,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17312855 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4309, 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=4309)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    This paper surveys library literature on cataloging and classification published in 2007-8, indicating its extent and range in terms of types of literature, major subject areas, and themes. The paper reviews pertinent literature in the following areas: the future of bibliographic control, general cataloging standards and texts, Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR), cataloging varied resources, metadata and cataloging in the Web world, classification and subject access, questions of diversity and diverse perspectives, additional reports of practice and research, catalogers' education and careers, keeping current through columns and blogs, and cataloging history.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  7. Ilik, V.; Storlien, J.; Olivarez, J.: Metadata makeover (2014) 0.03 
    0.032083966 = product of:
  0.06416793 = sum of:
    0.04072366 = weight(_text_:web in 2606) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04072366 = score(doc=2606,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.25239927 = fieldWeight in 2606, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2606)
    0.023444273 = product of:
      0.046888545 = sum of:
        0.046888545 = weight(_text_:22 in 2606) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.046888545 = score(doc=2606,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17312855 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = 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)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    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
  8. Bianchini, C.; Willer, M.: ISBD resource and Its description in the context of the Semantic Web (2014) 0.02 
    0.022765215 = product of:
  0.09106086 = sum of:
    0.09106086 = weight(_text_:web in 1998) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09106086 = score(doc=1998,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.5643819 = fieldWeight in 1998, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1998)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    This article explores the question "What is an International Standard for Bibliographic Description (ISBD) resource in the context of the Semantic Web, and what is the relationship of its description to the linked data?" This question is discussed against the background of the dichotomy between the description and access using the Semantic Web differentiation of the three logical layers: real-world objects, web of data, and special purpose (bibliographic) data. The representation of bibliographic data as linked data is discussed, distinguishing the description of a resource from the iconic/objective and the informational/subjective viewpoints. In the conclusion, the authors give views on possible directions of future development of the ISBD.
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  9. Pope, J.T.; Holley, R.P.: Google Book Search and metadata (2011) 0.02 
    0.02000121 = product of:
  0.08000484 = sum of:
    0.08000484 = weight(_text_:search in 1887) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08000484 = score(doc=1887,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.46558946 = fieldWeight in 1887, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1887)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    This article summarizes published documents on metadata provided by Google for books scanned as part of the Google Book Search (GBS) project and provides suggestions for improvement. The faulty, misleading, and confusing metadata in current Google records can pose potentially serious problems for users of GBS. Google admits that it took data, which proved to be inaccurate, from many sources and is attempting to correct errors. Some argue that metadata is not needed with keyword searching; but optical character recognition (OCR) errors, synonym control, and materials in foreign languages make reliable metadata a requirement for academic researchers. The authors recommend that users should be able to submit error reports to Google to correct faulty metadata.
    Object
    Google Book Search
  10. Kinstler, T.: Making search work for the library user (2013) 0.02 
    0.01979606 = product of:
  0.07918424 = sum of:
    0.07918424 = weight(_text_:search in 1477) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07918424 = score(doc=1477,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.460814 = fieldWeight in 1477, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1477)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
  11. Clarke, R.I.: Breaking records : the history of bibliographic records and their influence in conceptualizing bibliographic data (2015) 0.02 
    0.01763386 = product of:
  0.07053544 = sum of:
    0.07053544 = weight(_text_:web in 1877) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07053544 = score(doc=1877,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.43716836 = fieldWeight in 1877, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1877)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    A bibliographic record is a conceptual whole that includes all bibliographic information about a resource together in one place. With the Semantic Web, individual data statements are linked across the web. This position article argues that the traditional conceptualization of bibliographic records affects the affordances and limitations of that data. A historical analysis of the development of bibliographic records contrasted with the Semantic Web model reveals how the "record" model shaped library cataloging and the implications on library catalogs today. Reification of the record model for bibliographic data hampers possibilities for innovation in cataloging, inspiring a reconceptualization of bibliographic description.
  12. Dunsire, G.: FRBR and the Semantic Web (2012) 0.02 
    0.01763386 = product of:
  0.07053544 = sum of:
    0.07053544 = weight(_text_:web in 1928) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07053544 = score(doc=1928,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.43716836 = fieldWeight in 1928, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1928)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    Each of the FR family of models has been represented in Resource Description Framework (RDF), the basis of the Semantic Web. This has involved analysis of the entity-relationship diagrams and text of the models to identify and create the RDF classes, properties, definitions and scope notes required. The work has shown that it is possible to seamlessly connect the models within a semantic framework, specifically in the treatment of names, identifiers, and subjects, and link the RDF elements to those in related namespaces.
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  13. Bermes, E.: Enabling your catalogue for the semantic web (2013) 0.02 
    0.017452994 = product of:
  0.06981198 = sum of:
    0.06981198 = weight(_text_:web in 1481) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06981198 = score(doc=1481,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.43268442 = fieldWeight in 1481, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1481)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
  14. Bourdenet, P.: ¬The catalog resisting the Web : an historical perspective (2012) 0.01 
    0.014544163 = product of:
  0.05817665 = sum of:
    0.05817665 = weight(_text_:web in 324) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05817665 = score(doc=324,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.36057037 = fieldWeight in 324, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=324)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    Libraries are currently seeking to restructure their services and develop new cataloguing standards to position themselves on the web, which has become the main source of information and documents. The current upheaval within the profession is accompanied by the belief that libraries have a major role to play in identifying and supplying content due to their extensive high quality databases, which remain untapped despite efforts to increase catalog performance. They continue to rely on a strategy that has been proven successful since the mid-nineteenth century while seeking other models for their data. Today, they aim to exploit changes brought about by the web to improve content identification. The current intense debate on RDA implementation mirrors this desire for change. The debate is rooted in past efforts and yet tries to incite radical changes as it provides for interoperability from the creation of records through an object modeling in line with web standards and innovations. These innovations are presented through an historical perspective inspired by writings by librarians who are entrusted with helping in the development of bibliographic description standards.
  15. Ilik, V.: Cataloger makeover : creating non-MARC name authorities (2015) 0.01 
    0.014397987 = product of:
  0.05759195 = sum of:
    0.05759195 = weight(_text_:web in 1884) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05759195 = score(doc=1884,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.35694647 = fieldWeight in 1884, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1884)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    This article shares a vision of the enterprise of cataloging and the role of catalogers and metadata librarians in the twenty-first century. The revolutionary opportunities now presented by Semantic Web technologies liberate catalogers from their historically analog-based static world, re-conceptualize it, and transform it into a world of high dimensionality and fluidity. By presenting illustrative examples of innovative metadata creation and manipulation, such as non-MARC name authority records, we seek to contribute to the libraries' mission with innovative projects that enable discovery, development, communication, learning, and creativity, and hold promise to exceed users' expectations.
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  16. Willer, M.; Dunsire, G.: ISBD, the UNIMARC bibliographic format, and RDA : interoperability issues in namespaces and the linked data environment (2014) 0.01 
    0.014397987 = product of:
  0.05759195 = sum of:
    0.05759195 = weight(_text_:web in 1999) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05759195 = score(doc=1999,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.35694647 = fieldWeight in 1999, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1999)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    The article is an updated and expanded version of a paper presented to International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions in 2013. It describes recent work involving the representation of International Standard for Bibliographic Description (ISBD) and UNIMARC (UNIversal MARC) in Resource Description Framework (RDF), the basis of the Semantic Web and linked data. The UNIMARC Bibliographic format is used to illustrate issues arising from the development of a bibliographic element set and its semantic alignment with ISBD. The article discusses the use of such alignments in the automated processing of linked data for interoperability, using examples from ISBD, UNIMARC, and Resource Description and Access.
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  17. Forassiepi, S.: ISBD and REICAT : a relationship between past, present, and future (2014) 0.01 
    0.014397987 = product of:
  0.05759195 = sum of:
    0.05759195 = weight(_text_:web in 2001) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05759195 = score(doc=2001,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.35694647 = fieldWeight in 2001, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, 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.
  18. Tillett, B.B.: Complementarity of perspectives for resource descriptions (2015) 0.01 
    0.012595614 = product of:
  0.050382458 = sum of:
    0.050382458 = weight(_text_:web in 2288) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.050382458 = score(doc=2288,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.3122631 = fieldWeight in 2288, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2288)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    Bibliographic data is used to describe resources held in the collections of libraries, archives and museums. That data is mostly available on the Web today and mostly as linked data. Also on the Web are the controlled vocabulary systems of name authority files, like the Virtual International Authority File (VIAF), classification systems, and subject terms. These systems offer their own linked data to potentially help users find the information they want - whether at their local library or anywhere in the world that is willing to make their resources available. We have found it beneficial to merge authority data for names on a global level, as the entities are relatively clear. That is not true for subject concepts and terminology that have categorisation systems developed according to varying principles and schemes and are in multiple languages. Rather than requiring everyone in the world to use the same categorisation/classification system in the same language, we know that the Web offers us the opportunity to add descriptors assigned around the world using multiple systems from multiple perspectives to identify our resources. Those descriptors add value to refine searches, help users worldwide and share globally what each library does locally.
  19. LeBoeuf, P.: ¬A strange model named FRBRoo (2012) 0.01 
    0.012341131 = product of:
  0.049364526 = sum of:
    0.049364526 = weight(_text_:web in 1904) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.049364526 = score(doc=1904,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.3059541 = fieldWeight in 1904, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1904)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    Libraries and museums developed rules for the description of their collections prior to formalizing the underlying conceptualization reflected in such rules. That formalizing process took place in the 1990s and resulted in two independent conceptual models: FRBR for bibliographic information (published in 1998), and CIDOC CRM for museum information (developed from 1996 on, and issued as ISO standard 21127 in 2006). An international working group was formed in 2003 with the purpose of harmonizing these two models. The resulting model, FRBROO, was published in 2009. It is an extension to CIDOC CRM, using the formalism in which the former is written. It adds to FRBR the dynamic aspects of CIDOC CRM, and a number of refinements (e.g. in the definitions of Work and Manifestation). Some modifications were made in CIDOC CRM as well. FRBROO was developed with Semantic Web technologies in mind, and lends itself well to the Linked Data environment; but will it be used in that context?
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  20. Leresche, F.; Boulet, V.: RDA as a tool for the bibliographic transition : the French position (2016) 0.01 
    0.012341131 = product of:
  0.049364526 = sum of:
    0.049364526 = weight(_text_:web in 2953) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.049364526 = score(doc=2953,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049439456 = queryNorm
        0.3059541 = fieldWeight in 2953, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2953)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    This article presents the process adopted by the France to bring library catalogs to the Web of data and the RDA role in this general strategy. After analising RDA limits and inconsistencies, inherited from the tradition of AACR and MARC21 catalogues, the authors present the French approach to RDA and its positioning in correlation to international standards like ISBD and FRBR. The method adopted in France for FRBRising the catalogues go through a technical work of creating alignment beteween existing data, exploiting the technologies applied to the creation of data.bnf.fr and through a revision of the French cataloguing rules, allowing FRBRised metadata creation. This revision is based on RDA and it is setting up a French RDA application profile, keeping the analysis on the greater differences. RDA adoption, actually, is not a crucial issue in France and not a self standing purpose; it is just a tool for the transition of bibliographic data towards the Web of data.

Authors

Languages

  • e 62
  • i 2
  • d 1
  • f 1
  • More… Less…

Types

Themes