Search (8 results, page 1 of 1)

0.022033377 = sum of:
  0.010106622 = product of:
    0.04042649 = sum of:
      0.04042649 = weight(_text_:authors in 207) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04042649 = score(doc=207,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.22701477 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04979689 = queryNorm
          0.17807868 = fieldWeight in 207, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=207)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.011926754 = product of:
    0.023853509 = sum of:
      0.023853509 = weight(_text_:22 in 207) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.023853509 = score(doc=207,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.17438023 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04979689 = queryNorm
          0.13679022 = fieldWeight in 207, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=207)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Classification

025.3/071 22

DDC

025.3/071 22

Footnote

The eternal debate in the teaching of cataloging over theory versus practice emerges in this volume. As Li Si suggests in describing cataloging education in the People's Republic of China, the matter might be laid at the door of the faculty, stating, "Although the majority of teaching faculty members in the library and information science programs have a solid theoretical foundation from their school education and training, they do not normally possess practical work experience in their field of specialty and they are not familiar with the application of technologies in the field. In order to enhance their practical skills, these faculty members should be given the opportunity to work in libraries... This way, they would be able to put theory into practice and gain rich, practical field experience, thus improving the relevance and quality of their teaching (p. 97)." One wonders how warmly faculty members would welcome that kind of opportunity! On the other hand, in many places, onthe-job training is weak, as Shoichi Taniguchi describes it in Japan, "on the job training and continuing education are neither encouraged nor promoted (p. 132)." Among the most interesting and important aspects of this book are the tables of hard data it presents. Almost every chapter reports on surveys done by the authors on the state of library education in general and/or the kinds of offerings in cataloging and classification available within their countries. Some authors also include statistics on the numbers of persons receiving certificates, diplomas, and/or master's degrees, which is useful in understanding the different levels of expertise being developed over time. While one could argue that there are gaps in coverage, with large, influential countries such as France and Italy in Europe, Brazil, Bolivia, and Chile in South America, and Thailand and Myanmar in Asia, left out of the book, for the most part there is good representation from different parts of the globe. Education for Library Cataloging is a good choice as a textbook for coursework in International Librarianship as well as a primer in what to expect if one's information center is affiliated with partners outside the United States and Canada. This book should be seen as an important "must read" for all library students and practitioners concerned about issues of increasing globalization in bibliographic control. It is highly recommended."

0.020240374 = product of:
  0.040480748 = sum of:
    0.040480748 = product of:
      0.080961496 = sum of:
        0.080961496 = weight(_text_:22 in 4242) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.080961496 = score(doc=4242,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17438023 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04979689 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 4242, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4242)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

15. 6.1996 18:06:22

0.016866978 = product of:
  0.033733957 = sum of:
    0.033733957 = product of:
      0.06746791 = sum of:
        0.06746791 = weight(_text_:22 in 3948) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06746791 = score(doc=3948,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17438023 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04979689 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 3948, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3948)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

29. 8.2005 12:54:22

0.008433489 = product of:
  0.016866978 = sum of:
    0.016866978 = product of:
      0.033733957 = sum of:
        0.033733957 = weight(_text_:22 in 5582) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033733957 = score(doc=5582,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17438023 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04979689 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 5582, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5582)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Series

Cataloging and classification quarterly; vol.22, nos.3/4

0.0059034424 = product of:
  0.011806885 = sum of:
    0.011806885 = product of:
      0.02361377 = sum of:
        0.02361377 = weight(_text_:22 in 238) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02361377 = score(doc=238,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17438023 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04979689 = queryNorm
            0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 238, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=238)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Rez. in ZfBB 51(2004) H.1, S.54-55 (G. Pflug): "Unter dem wachsenden Einfluss der Informationstechnologie auf den Bibliotheksbereich nimmt die Katalogisierung eine Schlüsselstellung ein. Das vorliegende Werk gliedert sich in zwei Teile. Der erste Abschnitt ist mit »National Libraries« überschrieben, befasst sich jedoch nur mit der Library of Congress und der National Library of Canada. Ihm folgen Artikel über »Libraries around the world«. Dabei fälltjedoch auf, dass diese Studien zwar Bibliotheken in Großbritannien, Australien, Mittel- und Südamerika und selbst Afrika (Botswana) behandeln, nicht jedoch aus Kontinentaleuropa, trotz entsprechender Aktivitäten etwa in den Niederlanden, in Frankreich oder den deutschsprachigen Ländern. Nur DOBIS/LIBIS wird erwähnt, aber nur, weil es für kurze Zeit die kanadische Entwicklung beeinflusst hat. Im zweiten Teil kommen Katalogisierungsfachleute aus vier Spezial- und neun akademischen Bibliotheken - ausschließlich aus Nordamerika und Großbritannien - zu Wort. So enthält das Werk in 22 Beispielen Berichte über individuelle und regionale Lösungen. Dabei steht die Frage im Vordergrund, zu welchen Änderungen in der Katalogisierungs- und Sacherschließungspraxis die neuen elektronischen Techniken geführt haben. So streben z.B. die englischen Hochschulbibliotheken ein koordiniertes System an. Mit dem Übergang der British Library zu MARC 21 wird das Katalogsystem in Großbritannien nachhaltig beeinflusst - um nur zwei nahe liegende Beispiele zu nennen. Insgesamt werden drei Aspekte behandelt, die Automatisierungstechnik; die dabei einzusetzende Kooperation und das Outsourcing - nicht nur durch Übernahme von Daten anderer Bibliotheken oder durch Verbundsysteme, vor allem der Library of Congress, sondern auch durch Buchhandelsfirmen wie Blackwell North America Authority Control Service. In der Frage der Sacherschließung befassen sich die Beiträge mit den im amerikanischen Bereich üblichen Klassifikationssystemen, vor allem der Colon Classification, Dewey in seinen beiden Formen oder der Library of Congress Classification. Für die deutsche Diskussion sind diese Aspekte vor allem wegen des Übergangs der Deutschen Bibliothek in ihrer Nationalbibliografie zur DDC von großem Interesse (vgl. Magda Heiner-Freiling: Die DDC in der Deutschen Nationalbibliografie. In Dialog mit Bibliotheken. 15. 2003, Nr. 3, S. 8-13). Doch stellen auch die unterschiedlichen Überlegungen zur alphabetischen Katalogisierung, verbunden mit den da zugehörigen Datenbanken, einen interessanten Beitrag zur augenblicklichen Diskussion in Deutschland dar, da auch hier seit einigen Jahren die Katalogisierung nach RAK und ihre Ablösung eine lebhafte Diskussion ausgelöst hat, wie unter anderem der zusammenfassende Beitrag von Elisabeth Niggemann in: Dialog mit Bibliotheken (15. 2003, Nr. 2, S. 4-8) zeigt. Auch die angloamerikanischen und die mit ihnen zum Beispiel in Mexiko, Südamerika oder Australien verbundenen Bibliotheken - das zeigt das Buch deutlich - diskutieren die Frage der alphabetischen Katalogisierung kontrovers. So werden z.B. neben den dominanten AACR-Regeln mit ihrer Weiterentwicklung mehr als zehn andere Katalogisierungssysteme und rund 20 Online-Datenbanken behandelt. Damit liefert das Buch für die Diskussion in Deutschland und die anstehenden Entscheidungen in seiner Grundtendenz wie in den unterschiedlichen-auch widersprüchlichen-Aspekten dereinzelnen Beiträge wertvolle Anregungen."

0.0042878767 = product of:
  0.008575753 = sum of:
    0.008575753 = product of:
      0.034303013 = sum of:
        0.034303013 = weight(_text_:authors in 1716) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034303013 = score(doc=1716,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.22701477 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04979689 = queryNorm
            0.15110476 = fieldWeight in 1716, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1716)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  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.

0.0040426487 = product of:
  0.008085297 = sum of:
    0.008085297 = product of:
      0.03234119 = sum of:
        0.03234119 = weight(_text_:authors in 175) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03234119 = score(doc=175,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.22701477 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04979689 = queryNorm
            0.14246294 = fieldWeight in 175, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=175)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

The FRBR entities as much as their attributes and relationships are highlighted and analyzed in the first section of the work by authors such as: Olivia Madison, chair of the FRBR Study Group, Glenn Patton, Tom Delsey and Stefan Gradmann. One of the general ideas of this first part is that there is still work to be done for the extension of the model to cover more aspects of subject access. Olivia Madison, with an insider's point of view, takes the reader on a historical approach to the IFLA Study on FRBR. The subject representation and authority issues are illustrated by Patton and Delsey in two articles in which the FRANAR (Functional Requirements and Numbering of Authority Records) conceptual model is investigated. While speaking about the low visibility of library catalogues on the Web, Gradmann proposes as a solution the implementation of FRBR as RDF Schema and of RDF-based library catalogues using semantic Web technology. He explains how catalogues should go from the "librarian ivory tower" (p. 65) into the semantic Web and discusses the benefits of the proposed approach. The second section is dedicated to the applicability of the FRBR model to different types of library materials such as: hand press materials, in the article by Gunilla Jonsson, reiterating the expression problem; literary texts, in the view of the AustLit Gateway pointing out the use of enhanced manifestations by Kerry Kilner; musical aggregate works, seen as an experience of translation of the FRBR model by Patrick LeBoeuf; digital documents, in a description of the Norwegian Paradigma Project by Kertil Albertsen and Carol van Nuys; performing art productions, as creations difficult to be held in library collections by David Miller and Patrick LeBoeuf and oral tradition works as independent, collective but not impossible to grasp human creations by Yann Nicolas.
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."

0.0028585843 = product of:
  0.0057171686 = sum of:
    0.0057171686 = product of:
      0.022868674 = sum of:
        0.022868674 = weight(_text_:authors in 2312) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022868674 = score(doc=2312,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.22701477 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04979689 = queryNorm
            0.10073651 = fieldWeight in 2312, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2312)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

The section of background papers starts most appropriately by reprinting the Statement of Principles from the 1961 Paris Conference and continues with another twelve papers of varying lengths, most written specifically for the IME ICC. For the published report the papers have been organized to follow the order of topics assigned to the Tive working groups: Working Group 1 Personal names; WG2 Corporate bodies; WG3 Seriality; WG4 Multivolume/multipart structures; and WG5 Uniform titles, GMDs. Pino Buizza and Mauro Guerrini co-author a substantial paper "Author and title access point control: On the way national bibliographic agencies face the issue forty years after the Paris Principles," which was first presented in Italian at the November 2002 workshop an Cataloguing and Authority Control in Rome. Issues that remain unresolved are which name or title to adopt, which form of the name or title, and which entry word to select, while choice of headings has become more uniform. The impact of catalogue language (meaning both the language of the cataloguing agency and of the majority of users of the catalogue) an these choices is explored by examining the headings used in ten national authority files for a full range of names, personal and corporate. The reflections presented are both practical and grounded in theory. Mauro Guerrini, assisted by Pino Buizza and Lucia Sardo, contributes a further new paper "Corporate bodies from ICCP up to 2003," which is an excellent survey of the surprisingly controversial issue of corporate bodies as authors, starting with Panizzi, Jewett, Cutter, Dziatzko, Fumagalli, and Lubetzky, through the debate at the Paris Conference, to the views of Verona, Domanovszky and Carpenter, and work under the auspices of IFLA an the Form and structure of corporate headings (FSCH) project and its Rvew, as well as a look at the archival standard ISAAR(CPF). This paper is the only one to have a comprehensive bibliography.