Search (23 results, page 2 of 2)

2.2062263E-4 = product of:
  0.0033093393 = sum of:
    0.0033093393 = product of:
      0.0066186786 = sum of:
        0.0066186786 = weight(_text_:information in 1716) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0066186786 = score(doc=1716,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.1301088 = fieldWeight in 1716, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1716)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

Footnote

Essays live through nine present case studies of the use of EAD in specific organizations and projects. Those organizations include the Online Archive of California, the American Heritage Virtual Archive Project, the Research Libraries Group, Public Records Office of the UK, and its use in museums. Success seems to be the general conclusion of each of these case studies. Milestones reached included the creation of broad-based integrated access to archival finding aids, increased access to digital content for users, and redefining the definition and purpose of finding aids. Concerns about the future are also a theme in the case studies. Continuing challenges include improving access to primary sources, creating seamless technology, and assuring communication between competing cultural institutions for political dollars. Previous essays in this anthology discuss introductory concepts of EAD and its use in several institutional and government settings. However, the way in which EAD is transforming archival reference services is examined in the tenth essay, "Encoded Finding Aids as a Transforming Technology in Archival Reference Service." The author focuses an barriers such as technology, communications, and concerns but also discusses its potential to transform reference Services, including the standardization of finding aid information, increased search functions across finding aids, integration of finding aids with catalogs, and the human interface (self sufficiency, staff productivity, and need for education). The last essay in this anthology, "Popularizing the Finding Aid: Exploiting EAD to Enhance Online Discovery and Retrieval in Archival Information Systems by Diverse User Groups," describes the development of the traditional finding aid and how that process of development can be manipulated in light of EAD's advancing initiative. More importantly, the author presents ten strategies that may enhance browsing and retrieval in an EAD-based archival information system. In promoting EAD, the author notes that the "true potential of EAD does not lie in replicating the physical and intellectual form of the finding aid for online distribution. Rather, EAD allows archivists to contemplate how therr encoded finding aids might collectively populate a metadata infrastructure for more broadly conceived archival information systems" (p. 200). The ten strategies promoted include footnote chasing, function and repository scanning; subject, name, data, geographic, physical form or genre, top-down, and bottom-up searching. This anthology provides an excellent picture of the current state of encoded archival description an the Internet. The essays are well written and concise. The clear message is that EAD is working but that there is much work to be done to assure that archival information is easily located, available, and well described."

1.8604532E-4 = product of:
  0.0027906797 = sum of:
    0.0027906797 = product of:
      0.0055813594 = sum of:
        0.0055813594 = weight(_text_:information in 4058) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0055813594 = score(doc=4058,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.10971737 = fieldWeight in 4058, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4058)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

Content

Enthält die Beiträge: Blake, V.L.P.: Forging the Anglo-American Cataloging Alliance: descriptive cataloging, 1830-1908; M. Carpenter, M.: The original 73 rules of the British Museum: a preliminary analysis; De Rijk Spanhoff, E.: Principle issues: catalog paradigms, old and new; Mutula, S.M., Tsvakai, M.: Historical perspectives of cataloguing and classification; Barber, E.E., Tripaldi, N.M., Pisano, S.L.: Facts, approaches, and reflections an classification in the history of Argentine librarianship; MirandaArguedas, A.: Standardization of technical processes in Central American Libraries; Steinhagen, EN.: Historical perspective of a union catalog in Chile: authorities and periodicals; Liu, S.Q., Shen, Z.G.: The development of cataloging in China; Popst, H.: The development of descriptive cataloging in Germany; Croissant, C.R.: RAK or AACR2? : the current discussion in Germany an cataloging rules; Soltani, P.: Historical aspects of cataloging and classification in Iran; Takawashi, T.: Cataloging in Japan: relationship between Japanese and Western cataloging rules; Martinez-Arellano, F.F.: Cataloging and classification history in Mexico; Carter, R.C.: Three book collectors of imperial Spain; Lincoln, T.: Cultural reassertion of Alaska native languages and cultures: libraries' responses; Descriptive standards and the archival profession; Shuler, J.A.: Foundations of government information and bibliographic control in the United States: 1789-1900; Zhou, L.: Characteristics of material organization and classification in the Kinsey Institute Library; Goldberg, J.E.: Development of a universal law classification: a retrospective an Library of Congress Class K; Lubas, R.L.: The evolution of bibliographic control of maps; Guthrie II, L.S.: Monastic cataloging and classification and the beginnings of Class B at the Library of Congress; Bradley, C.J.: Classifying and cataloguing music in American Libraries: a historical overview; Haddad, P.: Cataloging and classification of Pacific and Asian language materials at the National Library of Australia; Russell, B.M.: Description and access in rare books cataloging: a historical survey; Waithe, M.E., Vintro, M.E.: Posthumously plagiarizing Oliva Sabuco: an appeal to cataloging librarians; Walravens, H.: Serials cataloguing in Germany: the historical development; Smiraglia, R.P.: The history of The Work in the modern catalog.

Imprint

New York : Haworth Information Press

9.302266E-5 = product of:
  0.0013953398 = sum of:
    0.0013953398 = product of:
      0.0027906797 = sum of:
        0.0027906797 = weight(_text_:information in 175) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0027906797 = score(doc=175,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.054858685 = fieldWeight in 175, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=175)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

Footnote

What is, after all the FRBR model? The question is asked in the subtitle itself: is it a "hype or cureall?" It certainly is the talk of the day in libraries and similar institutions, a very popular topic for professional meetings, a challenging task for system vendors and food for thought for scholars both in terminology and in content. As for the solutions it offers, they enable simplified and more structured catalogues of large collections and perhaps easier ways to cataloguing resources of many different types. Once implemented in catalogues, the benefits will be both on the librarian's side and on the end user's side. According to Patrick LeBoeuf the model is a beginning and there are two directions for its development as far as the authors of the articles imply: the first, oriented to the configuration of FRANAR or FRAR, the second, oriented to what has already been established and defined as FRSAR (Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Records). The latter is meant to build a conceptual model for Group 3 entities within the FRBR framework related to the aboutness of the work and assist in an assessment of the potential for international sharing and use of subject authority data both within the library sector and beyond. A third direction, not present in the work considered, yet mentioned by the editor, is oriented towards the development of "the CIDOC CRM semantic model for cultural heritage information in museums and assimilated institutions" (p. 6). By merging the FRBR working group with the CIDOC CRM Special Interest Group a FRBR/CRM Harmonization Group has been created its scope being the "translation" of FRBR into object-oriented formalism. The work under review is the expected and welcome completion of the FRBR Final Report of 1998, addressing librarians, library science teaching staff, students, and library system vendors, a comprehensive source of information on theoretical aspects and practical application of the FRBR conceptual model. A good companion clarifying many FRBR issues the collection is remarkably well structured and offers a step-by-step insight into the model. An additional feature of the work is the very helpful index at the back of the book providing an easy access to the main topics discussed."