Search (222 results, page 2 of 12)

0.020057783 = product of:
  0.08023113 = sum of:
    0.08023113 = weight(_text_:evolution in 3722) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08023113 = score(doc=3722,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.4096403 = fieldWeight in 3722, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3722)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Library users often need to search for locally produced dissertations and theses by access points, such as advisor or department of origin, that have not been supported in the cataloguing rules or USMARC bibliographic format. In the past, libraries needing to support such non conventional access were forced to use standard fields in unconventional ways. USMARC format integration and changes in OCLC fields have provided opportunities for libraries to bring local practice into conformity with AACR2R and OCLC standards. Reviews the literature of thesis cataloguing and use the evolution of policies at Northern Colorado University Libraries to suggest possible directions for changes in cataloguing practice

0.020057783 = product of:
  0.08023113 = sum of:
    0.08023113 = weight(_text_:evolution in 5382) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08023113 = score(doc=5382,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.4096403 = fieldWeight in 5382, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5382)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The University of Colorado Law Library has provided access to its collections for over 100 years. This article recaps the evolution of those efforts with emphasis on current issues such as defining a cataloging philosophy, cataloging Internet resources in a Web catalog, using genre terms, and using the Internet to increase productivity. Major historical trends in cataloging law collections in general are also discussed.

0.020057783 = product of:
  0.08023113 = sum of:
    0.08023113 = weight(_text_:evolution in 5409) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08023113 = score(doc=5409,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.4096403 = fieldWeight in 5409, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5409)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

With the introduction of the microcomputer in the 1980s, a revolution of sorts was initiated. In libraries this was evidenced by the acquisition of personal computers and the software to run on them. All that catalogers needed were cataloging rules and a MARC format to ensure their bibliographic control. However, little did catalogers realize they were dealing with an industry that introduced rapid technological changes, which effected continual revision of existing rules and the formulation of special guidelines to deal with the industry's innovative products. This article focuses on the attempts of libraries and organized cataloging groups to develop the Chapter 9 descriptive cataloging rules in AACR2; it highlights selected events and includes cataloging examples that illustrate the evolution of the chapter.

0.020057783 = product of:
  0.08023113 = sum of:
    0.08023113 = weight(_text_:evolution in 5634) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08023113 = score(doc=5634,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.4096403 = fieldWeight in 5634, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5634)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Studies of professions emphasize various means by which an occupation increases its authority over areas of activity within its jurisdiction. Development of standards and codification of knowledge are important stages in professionalization for any occupation. As technology became a more prevalent component of library bibliographic access, archivists began to seek ways to develop standards for archival description that would support information exchange and allow archives and manuscripts collections to be included in bibliographic utilities. This article describes the evolution of archival descriptive standards, beginning in the late 1970s, within the context of the development of the archival profession.

0.020057783 = product of:
  0.08023113 = sum of:
    0.08023113 = weight(_text_:evolution in 5635) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08023113 = score(doc=5635,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.4096403 = fieldWeight in 5635, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5635)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Studies of professions emphasize various means by which an occupation increases its authority over areas of activity within its jurisdiction. Development of standards and codification of knowledge are important stages in professionalization for any occupation. As technology became a more prevalent component of library bibliographic access, archivists began to seek ways to develop standards for archival description that would support information exchange and allow archives and manuscripts collections to be included in bibliographic utilities. This article describes the evolution of archival descriptive standards, beginning in the late 1970s, within the context of the development of the archival profession.

0.020057783 = product of:
  0.08023113 = sum of:
    0.08023113 = weight(_text_:evolution in 3770) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08023113 = score(doc=3770,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.4096403 = fieldWeight in 3770, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3770)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This entry explains the international standard that guides bibliographic description, the International Standard Bibliographic Description (ISBD) that contains the principles of descriptive cataloging. The standard will be analyzed by giving its definition, purposes, principles, and objectives; and by explaining its structure, uses, and acceptance around the world. Its need will be justified by providing a short history of the background and evolution of the publication, ending with the current version of the consolidated ISBD that integrates the description of all types of resources that had been covered by specialized ISBDs.

0.020057783 = product of:
  0.08023113 = sum of:
    0.08023113 = weight(_text_:evolution in 1879) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08023113 = score(doc=1879,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.4096403 = fieldWeight in 1879, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1879)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Many experts have proposed an evolution toward "next generation catalogs," whose main features are partly inspired by commercial websites such as Google or Amazon. This article examines pros and cons of this integration. It also aims to show how a qualitative approach helps to broaden understanding of web communication mechanisms. After discussing some examples of "next generation catalog" features, I analyze the interface of an online catalog responding to different users' information needs and seeking behaviors. In the conclusion I suggest that the right approach to integration is a "translation" (not a "copy and paste") between commercial and library logics.

0.020057783 = product of:
  0.08023113 = sum of:
    0.08023113 = weight(_text_:evolution in 1938) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08023113 = score(doc=1938,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.4096403 = fieldWeight in 1938, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1938)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The Library of Congress' Cataloging in Publication (CIP) Program has been in existence for forty years. During this time, the CIP Program has moved from a model where the Library of Congress created all pre-publication metadata for publishers to a partnership where other libraries share in the creation of metadata. This article documents the evolution of the Electronic Cataloging in Publication (ECIP) Cataloging Partnership Program. The ECIP Cataloging Partnership Program can be used as a model to leverage limited resources across libraries to the benefit of library users nationwide.

0.020057783 = product of:
  0.08023113 = sum of:
    0.08023113 = weight(_text_:evolution in 1959) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08023113 = score(doc=1959,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.4096403 = fieldWeight in 1959, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1959)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.020057783 = product of:
  0.08023113 = sum of:
    0.08023113 = weight(_text_:evolution in 1986) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08023113 = score(doc=1986,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.4096403 = fieldWeight in 1986, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1986)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This summary considers the final articles selected for the special issue, interweaving some common threads that bind them together in their consideration of the International Standard Bibliographic Description (ISBD), consolidated edition, 2011, as a bibliographic content standard. With discussions of (1) the historical and current evolution of the ISBD, (2) the concept of Universal Bibliographic Control relative to an emerging Semantic Web environment, (3) ISBD and national cataloging codes, and (4) the continuing challenges of "non-book" resources, as context, the article concludes by exploring the question, "Is there a future for the ISBD?"

0.020057783 = product of:
  0.08023113 = sum of:
    0.08023113 = weight(_text_:evolution in 5124) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08023113 = score(doc=5124,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.4096403 = fieldWeight in 5124, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5124)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This is an account of the experience of the National Library of Portugal (NLP) in the adaptation of cataloging rules and the development of the local practice in old manuscript cataloging. The evolution of the work upon which current policies and practice are based is presented. Also, the process and results of adapting UNIMARC (UNIversal MARC) to manuscripts is explained, showing how the whole practice of automated cataloging of manuscripts at the NLP has been an innovative and pioneering experience.

0.017192384 = product of:
  0.06876954 = sum of:
    0.06876954 = weight(_text_:evolution in 5514) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06876954 = score(doc=5514,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.35112026 = fieldWeight in 5514, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5514)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Presents an overview of the ISSN (International Standard Serial Number) in relation to current cataloging codes and evolving metadata standards. Covers the evolution and development of ISSN as a serials identifier; harmonization efforts with AACR2; the functions of identifiers in the electronic age; and the ISSN as a solution to current concerns in areas such as identification of serials and continuing resources, check-in, and obtaining metadata for electronic resources. Issues surrounding multiple manifestations and linking are also discussed. The National Serials Data Program functions as the official ISSN Center in the United States. As such, it works closely with the publishing community in assigning 5,000 to 6,000 ISSN numbers per year to American serials. The ISSN has the potential for identifying and providing access to serials and, in the near future, to many continuing resources as well.

0.017192384 = product of:
  0.06876954 = sum of:
    0.06876954 = weight(_text_:evolution in 5642) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06876954 = score(doc=5642,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.35112026 = fieldWeight in 5642, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5642)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.017192384 = product of:
  0.06876954 = sum of:
    0.06876954 = weight(_text_:evolution in 5643) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06876954 = score(doc=5643,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.35112026 = fieldWeight in 5643, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5643)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.017192384 = product of:
  0.06876954 = sum of:
    0.06876954 = weight(_text_:evolution in 5646) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06876954 = score(doc=5646,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.35112026 = fieldWeight in 5646, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5646)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Rare book cataloging codes and practices have been shaped by a constant interplay between the tradition of descriptive bibliography and the evolution of library cataloging codes. At the same time, technological changes, such as the emergence of bibliographic databases and online catalogs, have led to promises of increased flexibility and usability in records for rare books. This article will focus on the development of modern Anglo-American rare book cataloging, highlighting special access points that often appear to exist outside the mainstream of library cataloging. By focusing on the treatment of several "hallmarks" of rare book records in codes published during the second half of the twentieth century, the development of rare book cataloging and its relationship to the traditions of bibliography and general library emerges.

0.017192384 = product of:
  0.06876954 = sum of:
    0.06876954 = weight(_text_:evolution in 5647) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06876954 = score(doc=5647,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.35112026 = fieldWeight in 5647, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5647)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Rare book cataloging codes and practices have been shaped by a constant interplay between the tradition of descriptive bibliography and the evolution of library cataloging codes. At the same time, technological changes, such as the emergence of bibliographic databases and online catalogs, have led to promises of increased flexibility and usability in records for rare books. This article will focus on the development of modern Anglo-American rare book cataloging, highlighting special access points that often appear to exist outside the mainstream of library cataloging. By focusing on the treatment of several "hallmarks" of rare book records in codes published during the second half of the twentieth century, the development of rare book cataloging and its relationship to the traditions of bibliography and general library emerges.

0.017192384 = product of:
  0.06876954 = sum of:
    0.06876954 = weight(_text_:evolution in 394) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06876954 = score(doc=394,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.35112026 = fieldWeight in 394, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=394)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This paper examines library literature concerning the conflict in teaching cataloging, between education for librarianship and training for specific tasks performed in the library. The literature reflects fundamental trends in library education; balance between theory and practice, evolution from apprenticeship to graduate school and the role of cataloging in curricula. It has concerned six issues; practitioners as educators, differentiation of professional duties, centralization and cooperation, development of cataloging codes, technological change and anticipated professional functions. A more profound corollary issue is also addressed. Training prepares for the current environment; education prepares for change. The literature presents a dichotomous view, seeking resolution by balancing mutually exclusive elements. An historical perspective suggests a dialectical paradigm, a process of continuous interaction between opposing forces which produce a synthesis.

0.017192384 = product of:
  0.06876954 = sum of:
    0.06876954 = weight(_text_:evolution in 2626) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06876954 = score(doc=2626,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.35112026 = fieldWeight in 2626, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2626)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The growth of the rules which shape library catalogs and determine their character and usefulness is susceptible of much more extended treatment than is possible here. What is attempted in the following pages is to point out present trends and to indicate their significance. Evidently the year 1941 marked the beginning of a new phase in the evolution of cataloging rules. The publication then of the preliminary American second edition of the A.L.A. Catalog Rules appears as the culmination of a movement inspired exactly one hundred years earlier by the issue of Panizzi's rules. The latter followed a very long period in which rudimentary methods of cataloging slowly evolved and the need of rules to systematize the work gradually came to be recognized. As long as libraries were small and few books were published, the contents of a library could be recorded in any fashion that struck the fancy of the one in charge. Catalogs were made by librarians largely for their own use and had one simple function, that of an inventory or a collection of lists showing the holdings. The form and arrangement of the entries were arbitrary.

0.017192384 = product of:
  0.06876954 = sum of:
    0.06876954 = weight(_text_:evolution in 702) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06876954 = score(doc=702,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.35112026 = fieldWeight in 702, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=702)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Cataloging principles and objectives guide the formation of cataloging rules governing the organization of information within the library catalog, as well as the function of the catalog itself. Changes in technologies wrought by the internet and the web have been the driving forces behind shifting cataloging practice and reconfigurations of cataloging rules. Modern cataloging principles and objectives started in 1841 with the creation of Panizzi's 91 Rules for the British Museum and gained momentum with Charles Cutter's Rules for Descriptive Cataloging (1904). The first Statement of International Cataloguing Principles (ICP) was adopted in 1961, holding their place through such codifications as AACR and AACR2 in the 1970s and 1980s. Revisions accelerated starting in 2003 with the three original FR models. The Library Reference Model (LRM) in 2017 acted as a catalyst for the evolution of principles and objectives culminating in the creation of Resource Description and Access (RDA) in 2013.

0.014326988 = product of:
  0.05730795 = sum of:
    0.05730795 = weight(_text_:evolution in 1760) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05730795 = score(doc=1760,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.2926002 = fieldWeight in 1760, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1760)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The Library of Congress (LC) has many of the same challenges as other libraries, especially large ones. LC has many different types of resources - books, journals, maps, music, manuscripts, audio, moving image, still image, artifacts, electronic - with large collections of each. Different levels of access are needed for this material: for some, collection level bibliographic description is adequate; for many, item level access is adequate; but for others, such as sound recordings, analytic, or sub unit access is highly desirable.The sizes of the LC collections are a major challenge - over 125 million non-electronic and over 3 million electronic items (and growing rapidly). And finally, electronic resources are presenting us with new issues - from metadata to preservation to storage to linking techniques. LC has tried to approach these challenges from a service perspective. Access must be successful for the end user, which mandates as much coherence and consistency in the metadata as possible and access systems that are easy to use. This paper focuses an the Library of Congress' perspective an metadata in the following three areas: (1) descriptive metadata in our current operations, (2) pathways that are developing that will support possible evolution in the future, and (3) broader metadata needs with digital material. The discussion is from a metadata element set and format point of view, not a cataloging data and cataloging rules view. Most acronyms used in this paper are expanded in an Appendix.