Search (35 results, page 2 of 2)

0.0017016088 = product of:
  0.0034032175 = sum of:
    0.0034032175 = product of:
      0.006806435 = sum of:
        0.006806435 = weight(_text_:s in 2311) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006806435 = score(doc=2311,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.05008241 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046063907 = queryNorm
            0.1359047 = fieldWeight in 2311, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2311)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Pages

VIII, 524 S

Type

s

0.0017016088 = product of:
  0.0034032175 = sum of:
    0.0034032175 = product of:
      0.006806435 = sum of:
        0.006806435 = weight(_text_:s in 2313) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006806435 = score(doc=2313,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.05008241 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046063907 = queryNorm
            0.1359047 = fieldWeight in 2313, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2313)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Pages

197 S

Type

s

0.0017016088 = product of:
  0.0034032175 = sum of:
    0.0034032175 = product of:
      0.006806435 = sum of:
        0.006806435 = weight(_text_:s in 2314) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006806435 = score(doc=2314,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.05008241 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046063907 = queryNorm
            0.1359047 = fieldWeight in 2314, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2314)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Pages

672 S

Type

s

0.0014889077 = product of:
  0.0029778155 = sum of:
    0.0029778155 = product of:
      0.005955631 = sum of:
        0.005955631 = weight(_text_:s in 1443) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.005955631 = score(doc=1443,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.05008241 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046063907 = queryNorm
            0.118916616 = fieldWeight in 1443, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1443)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Pages

329 S

Type

s

0.0014889077 = product of:
  0.0029778155 = sum of:
    0.0029778155 = product of:
      0.005955631 = sum of:
        0.005955631 = weight(_text_:s in 1806) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.005955631 = score(doc=1806,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.05008241 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046063907 = queryNorm
            0.118916616 = fieldWeight in 1806, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1806)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Pages

73 S

Type

s

0.001203219 = product of:
  0.002406438 = sum of:
    0.002406438 = product of:
      0.004812876 = sum of:
        0.004812876 = weight(_text_:s in 1339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.004812876 = score(doc=1339,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.05008241 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046063907 = queryNorm
            0.09609913 = fieldWeight in 1339, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1339)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Editor

Chambers, S.

Footnote

Rez. in: BuB. 66(2014) H.7/8, S.566-567 (D. Askey)

Pages

XXVII, 212 S

Type

s

0.001177085 = product of:
  0.00235417 = sum of:
    0.00235417 = product of:
      0.00470834 = sum of:
        0.00470834 = weight(_text_:s in 3082) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.00470834 = score(doc=3082,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.05008241 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046063907 = queryNorm
            0.09401184 = fieldWeight in 3082, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3082)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Electronic Cataloging is the undertaking of three pioneers in library science: Sheila S. Intner, Sally C. Tseng, and Mary L. Larsgaard, who co-edited Maps and Related Cartographic Materials: Cataloging Classification, and Bibliographic Control (Haworth, 2000). With illustrations, references, additional reading lists, and case studies, this research tool offers you tips and strategies to make metadata work for you and your library. No one currently involved in information cataloging should be without this book! For a complete list of contents, visit our Web site at www.HaworthPress.com. Electronic Cataloging: AACR2 and Metadata for Serials and Monographs is a collection of papers about recent developments in metadata and its practical applications in cataloging. Acknowledged experts examine a wide variety of techniques for managing serials and monographs using standards and schemas like MARC, AACR2, ISSN, ISBD, and Dublin Core. From the broadest introduction of metadata usage to the revisions of AACR2 through 2000, this book offers vital analysis and strategy for achieving Universal Bibliographic Control. Electronic Cataloging is divided into three parts. The first is an introduction to metadata, what it is, and its relationship to the library in general. The second portion focuses in more an how metadata can be utilized by a library system and the possibilities in the near future. The third portion is very specific, dealing with individual standards of metadata and elements, such as AACR2 and MARC, as well as current policies and prospects for the future. Information covered in Electronic Cataloging includes: an overview of metadata and seriality and why it is important to the cataloging community Universal Bibliographic Control: what has succeeded so far in cataloging and how metadata will evolve the step-by-step process for creating an effective metadata repository for the community the inherent problems that accompany cataloging nonprint research materials, such as electronic serials and the Web metadata schemas and the use of controlled vocabularies and classification systems standards of metadata, including MARC, Dublin Core, RDF, and AACR2, with emphasis an the revisions and efforts made with AACR2 through 2000 an overview of the ISSN (International Serials Standard Number) and its relationships to current codes and metadata standards, including AACR2 and much more!

Content

Enthält die Beiträge: Editors' Introduction (Sheila S. Intner, Sally C. Tseng, and Mary Lynette Larsgaard) PART 1. Cataloging in an Electronic Age (Michael Gorman) Why Metadata? Why Me? Why Now? (Brian E. C. Schottlaender) PART 2. Developing a Metadata Strategy (Grace Agnew) Practical Issues in Applying Metadata Schemas and Controlled Vocabularies to Cultural Heritage Information (Murtha Baca) Digital Resources and Metadata Application in the Shanghai Library (Yuanliang Ma and Wei Liu) Struggling Toward Retrieval: Alternatives to Standard Operating Procedures Can Help Librarians and the Public (Sheila S. Intner) PART 3. AACR2 and Other Metadata Standards: The Way Forward (Ann Huthwaite) AACR2 and Metadata: Library Opportunities in the Global Semantic Web (Barbara B. Tillett) Seriality: What Have We Accomplished? What's Next? (Jean Hirons) MARC and Mark-Up (Erik Jul) ISSN: Dumb Number, Smart Solution (Regina Romano Reynolds) Index Reference Notes Included

Pages

182 S

Type

s

9.0241426E-4 = product of:
  0.0018048285 = sum of:
    0.0018048285 = product of:
      0.003609657 = sum of:
        0.003609657 = weight(_text_:s in 4530) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.003609657 = score(doc=4530,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.05008241 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046063907 = queryNorm
            0.072074346 = fieldWeight in 4530, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=4530)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Rez. in Mitt VÖB 64(2011) H.1, S.151-153 (S. Breitling): "Wie sieht die Rolle der Katalogisierung im 21. Jahrhundert aus? In diversen Blogs und Mailinglisten wird darüber seit geraumer Zeit diskutiert. Der Bereich Katalogisierung befindet sich in einer Phase tiefgreifenden Wandels, ausgelöst durch eine Vielzahl von Faktoren, von denen veränderte Nutzererwartungen bei der Recherche und die wachsende Menge an neuen zu katalogisierenden Materialien (e-Books, Web-Ressourcen etc.) und Formaten nur zwei Aspekte darstellen. Das technische Umfeld wird nicht zuletzt durch fortgeschrittene Möglichkeiten im Bereich Retrieval und Präsentation geprägt. Wie schafft man es, dass Katalogisierung als Teil des gesamten Bibliothekswesens relevant und zeitgemäß bleibt? Welche der in Jahrzehnten Katalogisierungspraxis erarbeiteten Standards sind erhaltenswert, und welche sind im Hinblick auf den Fortschritt der IT und ein mögliches Semantic Web vielleicht gar nicht mehr nötig oder müssen an die Gegebenheiten angepasst werden? Mit diesen und anderen Fragen beschäftigt sich die Aufsatzsammlung "Conversations with catalogers in the 21st century". In der Community bekannte Personen wie Martha Yee, Christine Schwartz oder James Weinheimer kommen zu Wort, aus dem deutschsprachigen Raum Bernhard Eversberg, Entwickler des Bibliothekssystems Allegro.

Pages

xii, 283 S

Type

s

8.508044E-4 = product of:
  0.0017016088 = sum of:
    0.0017016088 = product of:
      0.0034032175 = sum of:
        0.0034032175 = weight(_text_:s in 4058) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0034032175 = score(doc=4058,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.05008241 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046063907 = queryNorm
            0.06795235 = fieldWeight in 4058, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4058)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Pages

xxx S

Type

s

7.8151375E-4 = product of:
  0.0015630275 = sum of:
    0.0015630275 = product of:
      0.003126055 = sum of:
        0.003126055 = weight(_text_:s in 1716) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.003126055 = score(doc=1716,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.05008241 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046063907 = queryNorm
            0.062418222 = fieldWeight in 1716, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1716)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Rez. in: JASIST 54(2003) no.9, S.909-910 (D.A. Stirling): "Archival description enjoys a long history of use. As most readers know, archives differ from libraries relative to the nature of materials held in those respective repositories. Methods of archival description of hardcopy documents are well established; however, encoded archival description (EAD) an the Internet is relatively new, with the first version released in 1998 by the Society of American Archivists and the Library of Congress Network Development & MARC Standards Office. This book provides an accounting of EAD an the Internet in an anthology format, presenting ten essays by single and multiple authors. As descrbbnd by the two editors, "the papers in this volume are intended to provide an introduction to archival description and EAD. . and its impact and potential impact an users and reference Services" (p. 4). The first two essays provide a detailed introduction to EAD an the Internet. The first essay, "Archival Description: Content and Context in Search of Structure," reviews the basic concepts of EAD and is relatively basic, including standard definitions of related archival principles. The second essay, "The Development and Structure of the Encoded Archival Description Document Type Definition," continues the introductory thread and expands the introduction to focus an the function and Structure of traditional paper-based archival finding aids and their application to the electronic archival environment. The third essay, "Stargazing: Locating EAD in the Descriptive Firmament," delves into the technical Structure of EAD, focusing an it as a communication tool and data structure standard. The author also writes about an EAD compatriot, the International Council an Archives' adoption in 1993 of the Ad Hoc Commission an Descriptive Standards. The fourth essay, "Archival Cataloging and the Internet: The Implications and Impact of EAD," is the first introduction in the anthology to the use of EAD and the Internet. Although EAD is thought by some to negate the need for MARC, the author speaks to the efficacy of EAD in the hyperlinked world of the Internet. Of particular interest is that the EAD environment enables contextualized search capabilities.

Pages

241 S

Type

s

7.520119E-4 = product of:
  0.0015040238 = sum of:
    0.0015040238 = product of:
      0.0030080476 = sum of:
        0.0030080476 = weight(_text_:s in 5862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0030080476 = score(doc=5862,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.05008241 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046063907 = queryNorm
            0.060061958 = fieldWeight in 5862, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5862)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Type

s

6.7261996E-4 = product of:
  0.0013452399 = sum of:
    0.0013452399 = product of:
      0.0026904799 = sum of:
        0.0026904799 = weight(_text_:s in 2312) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0026904799 = score(doc=2312,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.05008241 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046063907 = queryNorm
            0.05372105 = fieldWeight in 2312, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2312)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Rez. in: KO 31(2004) no.4, S.255-257: (P. Riva): "Cataloguing standardization at the international level can be viewed as proceeding in a series of milestone conferences. This meeting, the first in a series which will cover different regions of the world, will take its place in that progression. The first IFLA Meeting of Experts an an International Cataloguing Code (IME ICC), held July 28-30, 2003 at Die Deutsche Bibliothek in Frankfurt, gathered representatives of almost all European countries as well as three of the four AACR author countries. As explained in the introduction by Barbara Tillett, chair of the IME ICC planning committee, the plan is for five meetings in total. Subsequent meetings are to take place in Buenos Aires, Argentina (held August 17-18, 2004) for Latin America and the Carribean, to be followed by Alexandria, Egypt (2005) for the Middle East, Seoul, South Korea (2006) for Asia, and Durban, South Africa (2007) for Africa. The impetus for planning these meetings was triggered by the 40th anniversary of the Paris Principles, approved at the International Conference an Cataloguing Principles held in 1961. Many will welcome the timely publication of the reports and papers from this important conference in book form. The original conference website (details given an p. 176) which includes most of the same material, is still extant, but the reports and papers gathered into this volume will be referred to by cataloguing rule makers long after the web as we know it has transformed itself into a new (and quite possibly not backwards compatible) environment.
Ton Heijligers reflects an the relation of the IME ICC effort to AACR and calls for an examination of the principles and function of the concept of main entry in his brief paper "Main entry into the future?" Ingrid Parent's article "From ISBD (S) to ISBD(CR): a voyage of discovery and alignment" is reprinted from Serials Librarian as it tells of the successful project not only to revise an ISBD, but also to harmonize three Codes for serials cataloguing: ISBD (CR), ISSN and AACR. Gunilla Jonsson's paper "The bibliographic unit in the digital context" is a perceptive discussion of level of granularity issues which must be addressed in deciding what to catalogue. Practical issues and user expectation are important considerations, whether the material to be catalogued is digital or analog. Ann Huthwaite's paper "Class of materials concept and GMDs" as well as Tom Delsey's ensuing comments, originated as Joint Steering Committee restricted papers in 2002. It is a great service to have them made widely available in this form as they raise fundamental issues and motivate work that has since taken place, leading to the current major round of revision to AACR. The GMD issue is about more than a list of terms and their placement in the cataloguing record, it is intertwined with consideration of whether the concept of classes of materials is helpful in organizing cataloguing rules, if so, which classes are needed, and how to allow for eventual integration of new types of materials. Useful in the Code comparison exercise is an extract of the section an access points from the draft of revised RAK (German cataloguing rules). Four short papers compare aspects of the Russian Cataloguing Rules with RAK and AACR: Tatiana Maskhoulia covers corporate body headings; Elena Zagorskaya outlines current development an serials and other continuing resources; Natalia N. Kasparova covers multilevel structures; Ljubov Ermakova and Tamara Bakhturina describe the uniform title and GMD provisions. The website includes one more item by Kasparova "Bibliographic record language in multilingual electronic communication." The volume is rounded out by the appendix which includes the conference agenda, the full list of participants, and the reports from the five working groups. Not for the casual reader, this volume is a must read for anyone working an cataloguing code development at the national or international levels, as well as those teaching cataloguing. Any practising cataloguer will benefit from reading the draft statement of principles and the three presentation papers, and dipping into the background papers."
Weitere Rez. in: ZfBB 52(2005) H.3/4, S.227-228 (K. Haller): " ... Im Mittelpunkt der Publikation steht das revidierte Statement of International Cataloguing Principles. Es wendet sich mit seinen Grundsätzen gleichermaßen an Bibliografien und Bibliothekskataloge sowie Datensammlungen in Archiven, Museen und dergleichen Einrichtungen. Terminologisch und inhaltlich geht das Statement von den Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) aus. Durch die Functional Requirements and Numbering of Authority Records (FRANAR) werden die Normdateien und die Sacherschließung in das Statement eingebracht. Die FRBR sind ein theoretisches Modell, ein strategisches Dokument, in dem durch die Entitäten die logischen Zusammenhänge dargestellt und damit die notwendi ge Erschließungsqualität definiert wird. Es geht um klare Grundsätze für Wahl, Anzahl und Art der Suchbegriffe (access points) und deren Beziehungen. ... Insgesamt ist die Publikation sehr zu begrüßen und als Pflichtlektüre allen Verantwortlichen im Erschließungsbereich und dem in Ausbildung befindlichen Nachwuchs dringend zu empfehlen."

Pages

IV, 286 S

Type

s

6.512615E-4 = product of:
  0.001302523 = sum of:
    0.001302523 = product of:
      0.002605046 = sum of:
        0.002605046 = weight(_text_:s in 1729) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.002605046 = score(doc=1729,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.05008241 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046063907 = queryNorm
            0.052015185 = fieldWeight in 1729, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1729)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Rez. in: BuB 55(2003) H.4, S.259-260 (B. Rohde): "»Nikolausbeschluss« - ein recht untypischer Fachausdruck im Bibliothekswesen. Dennoch gibt es sicherlich nur wenige Personen in den wissenschaftlichen Bibliotheken Deutschlands, die mit diesem Begriff nichts anzufangen wissen. »Der Standardisierungsausschuss strebt grundsätzlich einen Umstieg von den deutschen auf internationale Regelwerke und Formate (AACR und MARC) an«, entschied das dem Hause Der Deutschen Bibliothek angegliederte nationale Gremium für Regelwerksfragen am 6. Dezember 2001. Der geplante Umstieg vom derzeitigen nationalen Datenformat MAB und Regelwerk RAK auf das aus dem angloamerikanischen Raum stammende MARC-Datenformat (Machine Readable Cataloging) sowie das Katalogregelwerk AACR (Anglo-American Cataloging Rules), derzeit in der 1988 revidierten zweiten Ausgabe vorliegend, wurde letztes Jahr wie kein anderesThema auf breiter Basis diskutiert. Eine Gruppe Studierender am Institut für Bibliothekswissenschaft der Humboldt-Universität Berlin hat nun diese Diskussion aufgegriffen. In ihrem Publikationsprojekt unter der Leitung der Herausgeberin Petra Hauke ist es ihnen gelungen, Vertreter der unterschiedlichsten Meinungen zum Thema » RAK versus AACR« als Autoren für Einzelbeiträge in diesem Sammelband zu gewinnen. - Sachliche Diskussion - Wer die Diskussion verfolgt hat, weiß einen Teil der Autoren einer entsprechenden Meinungsfraktion ohne weiteres zuzuordnen. Die Diskussion ist auch mit Beteiligung einiger der Autoren in den fachspezifischen Mailinglisten tagesaktuell teilweise sehr heftig geführt worden. Mitunter sind die Beiträge auch durch Veröffentlichung an anderer Stelle oder durch Vorträge bereit bekannt gewesen und haben für diesen Band eine Oberarbeitung erfahren. Wenn auch der Begriff »versus« aus dem Titel den recht deutlichen emotionalen Frontverlauf zwischen Gegnern und Befürwortern des geplanten Umstiegs einfängt, so finden sich doch die Vertreter der verschiedensten Meinungsrichtungen auf einer sachlichen Ebene in diesem Buch wieder. Insofern kann es zum Verständnis der jeweiligen Gegenseite beitragen, ebenso wie zur Meinungsbildung bei Personen, die sich mit diesem Thema noch nicht intensiv beschäftigt haben. Quasi als »Repräsentantinnen« Der Deutschen Bibliothek und damit des Standardisierungsausschusses als beschlussfassendes Gremium zeigen Renate Gömpel und Gudrun Henze im einführenden Beitrag in erster Linie auf entwicklungsgeschichtlicher Ebene die Unterschiede und Gemeinsamkeiten beider Regelwerke auf. Die Vorgeschichte des Umstiegsbeschlusses wird ebenfalls nachgezeichnet sowie ein Ausblick auf die weitere Planung gegeben. Auch führt das Autorinnenduo Gründe auf, die aus Sicht Der Deutschen Bibliothek für einen Umstieg sprechen. Tatsächlich hat Die Deutsche Bibliothek als größter nationaler Datenlieferant sicherlich auch das größte Interesse an einem Umstieg aus wirtschaftlichen Gründen. Zur bisherigen Umstiegsdiskussion hat Bernhard Eversberg durch seine Online-Umfrage der breiten Bibliotheksbasis Gehör verschafft. In seiner »Theorie der Bibliothekskataloge und Suchmaschinen« erarbeitet er die gemeinsamen und unterschiedlichen Grundlagen dieser beiden Suchwerkzeuge. Er weist hierbei auch auf die Bedeutung des Datenformates hin, das getrennt von den Regelwerken zu betrachten sei. Besondere Aufmerksamkeit verdient auch der Beitrag von Luise Hoffmann; das Projekt der Machbarkeitsstudie zum Umstieg von Seiten Der Deutschen Bibliothek liegt in ihren Händen. In ihrem Beitrag hat sie die verantwortungsvolle Aufgabe übernommen, die beiden Regelwerke aufgrund ihrer inneren Struktur zu vergleichen. Gemeinsamkeiten und Unterschiede im Aufbau, bei den Bestimmungen für Haupt- und Nebeneinträge sowie den Ansetzungsregeln von Personen und Körperschaften kommen hier nicht zu kurz. Ihr Versuch, »Vorurteile abzubauen und die Gemeinsamkeiten der Regelwerke hervorzuheben«, trägt sehr dazu bei, dem strikten »versus« die Spitze zu nehmen.

Pages

208 S

Type

s

6.381033E-4 = product of:
  0.0012762066 = sum of:
    0.0012762066 = product of:
      0.0025524131 = sum of:
        0.0025524131 = weight(_text_:s in 1675) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0025524131 = score(doc=1675,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.05008241 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046063907 = queryNorm
            0.050964262 = fieldWeight in 1675, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1675)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Pages

VIII, 186 S

Type

s

6.016095E-4 = product of:
  0.001203219 = sum of:
    0.001203219 = product of:
      0.002406438 = sum of:
        0.002406438 = weight(_text_:s in 175) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.002406438 = score(doc=175,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.05008241 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046063907 = queryNorm
            0.048049565 = fieldWeight in 175, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.0872376 = idf(docFreq=40523, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=175)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Enthält die Beiträge: Zumer, M.: Dedication [to Zlata Dimec]; P. Le Boeuf: FRBR: Hype or Cure-All? Introduction; O.M.A. Madison: The origins of the IFLA study an functional requirements for bibliographic records; G.E. Patton: Extending FRBR to authorities; T. Delsey: Modeling subject access: extending the FRBR and FRANAR conceptual models; S. Gradmann: rdfs:frbr - Towards an implementation model for library catalogs using semantic web technology; G. Johsson: Cataloguing of hand press materials and the concept of expression in FRBR; K. Kilner: The AustLit Gateway and scholarly bibliography: a specialist implementation of the FRBR; P. Le Boeuf: Musical works in the FRBR model or "Quasi la Stessa Cosa": variations an a theme by Umberto Eco; K. Albertsen, C. van Nuys: Paradigma: FRBR and digital documents; D. Miller, P Le Boeuf: "Such stuff as dreams are made on": How does FRBR fit performing arts?; Y. Nicolas: Folklore requirements for bibliographic records: oral traditions and FRBR; B.B. Tillett: FRBR and cataloging for the future; Z. Dimec, M. Zumer, G.J.A. Riesthuis: Slovenian cataloguing practice and Functional Requirements for Bibliography Records: a comparative analysis; M. Zumer: Implementation of FRBR: European research initiative; T.B. Hicley, E.T. O'Neill: FRBRizing OCLC's WorldCat; R. Sturman: Implementing the FRBR conceptual approach in the ISIS software environment: IFPA (ISIS FRBR prototype application); J. Radebaugh, C. Keith: FRBR display tool; D.R. Miller: XOBIS - an experimental schema for unifying bibliographic and authority records

Footnote

Rez. in: KO 33(2006) no.1, S.57-58 (V. Francu):"The work is a collection of major contributions of qualified professionals to the issues aroused by the most controversial alternative to organizing the bibliographic universe today: the conceptual model promoted by the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA) known by the name of Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR). The main goals of the work are to clarify the fundamental concepts and terminology that the model operates with, inform the audience about the applicability of the model to different kinds of library materials and bring closer to those interested the experiments undertaken and the implementation of the model in library systems worldwide. In the beginning, Patrick LeBoeuf, the chair of the IFLA FRBR Review Group, editor of the work and author of two of the articles included in the collection, puts together in a meaningful way articles about the origins and development of the FRBR model and how it will evolve, thus facilitating a gradual understanding of its structure and functionalities. He describes in the Introduction the FRBR entities as images of bibliographic realities insisting on the "expression debate". Further he concentrates on the ongoing or planned work still needed (p. 6) for the model to be fully accomplished and ultimately offer the desired bibliographic control over the actual computerized catalogues. The FRBR model associated but not reduced to the "FRBR tree" makes it possible to map the existing linear catalogues to an ontology, or semantic Web by providing a multitude of relationships among the bibliographic entities it comprises.

Pages

xxii, 303 S

Type

s