Search (381 results, page 2 of 20)

0.07627986 = product of:
  0.15255973 = sum of:
    0.15255973 = sum of:
      0.11749808 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 192) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.11749808 = score(doc=192,freq=14.0), product of:
          0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051756795 = queryNorm
          0.57602817 = fieldWeight in 192, product of:
            3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
              14.0 = termFreq=14.0
            3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=192)
      0.035061657 = weight(_text_:22 in 192) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.035061657 = score(doc=192,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18124348 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051756795 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 192, 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=192)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

German academic libraries acquire a large number of books from British and American publishers. The bibliographic records of the Library of Congress and the British National Bibliography are offered in most German library networks. Thus, projects REUSE and REUSE+ were undertaken when there was a demand for harmonization of Germany cataloging rules with AACR2 (Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules). Experts in the United States and Germany systematically analyzed bibliographic data and compared the codes on which the data were based. Major and minor differences in cataloging rules were identified. The REUSE group proposed German participation in international authority files and changes in RAK, the German cataloging rules. In REUSE+ the different types of hierarchical bibliographic structures in USMARC and MAB2 and other German formats were analyzed. The German project group made suggestions concerning both the German formats and the USMARC format. Steps toward rule alignment and harmonization of online requirements were made when the German Cataloging Rules Conference made decisions on resolutions prepared by the Working Groups on Descriptive Cataloging that dealt with titles, encoding of form titles and conference terms, prefixes in names, hierarchies, entries under persons and corporate bodies, and the conceptual basis of RAK2 in the context of harmonization. Although problems remain, German rule makers have made progress toward internationality.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

Footnote

Beitrag in einem Themenheft "What in the World...Cataloging on an International Scale": papers from the ALCTS preconference, June 26, 1998 "What in the World...Cataloging on an International Scale". ALCTS Preconference, Washington, D.C.

0.07432911 = product of:
  0.14865822 = sum of:
    0.14865822 = sum of:
      0.106584236 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 134) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.106584236 = score(doc=134,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051756795 = queryNorm
          0.52252364 = fieldWeight in 134, product of:
            2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
              8.0 = termFreq=8.0
            3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=134)
      0.042073987 = weight(_text_:22 in 134) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042073987 = score(doc=134,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18124348 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051756795 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 134, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=134)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Libraries may vary in the level and fullness of cataloging they give to video recordings and in the methods they use to provide access to them. This paper reports the results of a survey exploring the level of cataloging and access methods applied to videos, the degree to which catalogers view screen credits, and how often various credit information is included and used to create access points in catalog records in selected U. S. public and Association of Research Libraries member libraries. Resources for cataloging videos also were examined. Results showed that most libraries cataloged videos at the full level and provided access points to similar types of information in catalog records. Academic librarians reported viewing videos and providing access points to certain information to a greater extent than public librarians did. This study offers a general picture of the credit information libraries include or omit in video catalog records.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.07432911 = product of:
  0.14865822 = sum of:
    0.14865822 = sum of:
      0.106584236 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 150) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.106584236 = score(doc=150,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051756795 = queryNorm
          0.52252364 = fieldWeight in 150, product of:
            2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
              8.0 = termFreq=8.0
            3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=150)
      0.042073987 = weight(_text_:22 in 150) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042073987 = score(doc=150,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18124348 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051756795 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 150, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=150)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The provision of access to materials in special collections intersects the fields of cataloging and special collections librarianship, sharing characteristics and challenges with both. In order to reveal the changing expectations regarding special collections cataloging professionals, the author examined job notices for positions advertised in C&RL News from 1980 to 2000. Three related hypotheses were tested in this study: fixed-term appointments would become more common; published requirements for consideration would be more rigorous; and positions would offer less relative compensation than in the past. These hypotheses were demonstrated to be untrue. In a larger context, the results of this study can be extrapolated to suggest means of improving education and training for professionals in special collections cataloging, highlighting the skills and abilities future employing institutions will be seeking.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.07432911 = product of:
  0.14865822 = sum of:
    0.14865822 = sum of:
      0.106584236 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 161) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.106584236 = score(doc=161,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051756795 = queryNorm
          0.52252364 = fieldWeight in 161, product of:
            2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
              8.0 = termFreq=8.0
            3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=161)
      0.042073987 = weight(_text_:22 in 161) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042073987 = score(doc=161,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18124348 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051756795 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 161, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=161)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This article describes the use of the World Wide Web as a valuable name authority resource and tool for special collections analytic-level cataloging and the specific goal of fully discovering the names of people who lived in the past as well as those from the present. Current tools and initiatives such as the Name Authority Component of the Program for Cooperative Cataloging (NACO) and the Library of Congress Name Authority File have a specific mission and are partially helpful. Web resources encompassing special collections are often intricate and require global and enhanced resources to continue what have been the guiding principles, tradition, and value of cataloging: to discover works via many points of entry; to find works by or about the same person, topic, or title; and to continue the great cataloging legacies of standards and cooperation.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.07432911 = product of:
  0.14865822 = sum of:
    0.14865822 = sum of:
      0.106584236 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 1087) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.106584236 = score(doc=1087,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051756795 = queryNorm
          0.52252364 = fieldWeight in 1087, product of:
            2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
              8.0 = termFreq=8.0
            3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1087)
      0.042073987 = weight(_text_:22 in 1087) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042073987 = score(doc=1087,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18124348 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051756795 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1087, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1087)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The Core Standard for Rare Books, known as the DCRB Core standard, was approved by the Program for Cooperative Cataloging for use beginning in January 1999. Comparable to the core standards for other types of materials, the DCRB Core standard provides requirements for an intermediate level of bibliographic description for the cataloging of rare books. While the Core Standard for Books seems to have found a place in general cataloging practice, the DCRB Core standard appears to have met with resistance among rare book cataloging practitioners. This study investigates the extent to which such resistance exists by examining all of the DCRB Core records in the OCLC (Online Computer Library Center) Online Union Catalog (WorldCat) and the Research Libraries Croup Union Catalog (RLIN) databases that were created during the standard's first five years. The study analyzes the content of the records for adherence to the standard and investigates the ways in which the flexibility of the standard and cataloger's judgment augmented many records with more than the mandatory elements of description and access.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.070086576 = product of:
  0.14017315 = sum of:
    0.14017315 = sum of:
      0.11538082 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 207) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.11538082 = score(doc=207,freq=54.0), product of:
          0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051756795 = queryNorm
          0.56564844 = fieldWeight in 207, product of:
            7.3484693 = tf(freq=54.0), with freq of:
              54.0 = termFreq=54.0
            3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
            0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=207)
      0.024792334 = weight(_text_:22 in 207) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.024792334 = score(doc=207,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.18124348 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051756795 = 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)

Abstract

Co-published simultaneously as Cataloging & classification quarterly, volume 41, number 2, 2005 and volume 41, numbers 3/4, 2006.

Classification

025.3/071 22

Content

Inhalt: Education and training for cataloguing at the University of Botswana Library : an overview / Rose Tiny Kgosiemang -- The relevance of cataloguing in library science curriculum in Cross River State of Nigeria in this technological age / J.I. Iwe -- The education and training of cataloguing students in South Africa through distance education / Linda M. Cloete -- Education of cataloging and classification in China / Zhanghua Ma -- The status quo and future development of cataloging and classification education in China / Li Si -- Education for knowledge organization : the Indian scene / K.S. Raghavan -- Current status of cataloging and classification education in Japan / Shoichi Taniguchi -- A study on the job training and self-training of the cataloging and classification librarians working in South Korean academic libraries / Chul-Wan Kwak -- Beyond our expectations : a review of an independent learning module in descriptive cataloguing at the Queensland University of for cataloguing and classification in Australia / Ross Harvey, Susan Reynolds -- Education for cataloging and classification in Austria and Germany / Monika Münnich, Heidi Zotter-Straka, Petra Hauke -- Education and training on studies and professional librarianship schools / Anna Sitarska -- Cataloging education on the sunny side of the Alps / Jerry D. Saye, Alenka ^Sauperl -- Education for cataloging in Spanish universities : a descriptive and López-Cózar -- Education and training for cataloguing and classification in the British Isles / J.H. Bowman -- The teaching of information processing in the University of Buenos Aires, Argentina / Elsa E. Barber, Silvia L. Pisano -- Education for cataloging and classification in Mexico / Filiberto Felipe Martínez Arellano -- Education for cataloging and related areas in Peru / Ana María Talavera Ibarra -- Cataloging and classification education in Egypt : stressing the fundamentals while moving toward automated applications / Mohammed Fat'hy Abdel Hady, Ali Kamal Shaker -- An account of cataloging and classification education in Iranian universities / Mortaza Kokabi -- Cataloging instruction in Israel / Snunith Shoham -- Continuing education for catalogers in Saudi Arabia / Zahiruddin Khurshid.

DDC

025.3/071 22

Footnote

Rez. in: KO 33(2006) no.2, S.119-20 (S.S. Intner): "This survey of cataloging education around the world offers readers a rich menu of experiences, educational offerings, and approaches to the subject of cataloging education as it is currently practiced in 24 countries of the world, excluding the United States and Canada. The exclusion does not mean that English-speaking countries are entirely absent from the book, however. Two nations outside North America, South Africa (in one chapter) and Australia (in two chapters), are covered. The chapters are organized geographically, beginning with the African continent, and followed by several each under headings for Asia, Australia (two chapters), Europe, Latin America, and the Middle East. Nations whose cataloging education programs are described include (in order of presentation) Botswana, Nigeria, South Africa, China (both the People's Republic of China and Taiwan), India, Japan, South Korea, Australia, Austria and Germany (described together in one chapter), Poland, Slovenia, Spain, the British Isles (England, Scotland, and Wales), Argentina, Mexico, Peru, Egypt, Iran, Israel, and Saudi Arabia. As readers might expect, many chapters reflect common experiences among the countries, particularly regarding the proliferation of subjects in competition with cataloging and classification in library school curricula. There are also some common problems, such as dealing with the changes in education and training prompted by automation. Generally, computer-based cataloging is not a new issue anywhere, although in some areas of the world, catalogers still work with manual systems. Describing cataloging education in Nigeria, J. I. Iwe states: "... the card catalogue is still being used in all libraries, including the University of Calabar library where the only library school in the state exists (p. 33)." In other places, computer infrastructure has developed to a level that supports coursework online. As Linda M. Cloete writes, "The ultimate goal of the training resource program is to develop an online, fully interactive course: an online virtual cataloging classroom (p. 66)."
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."

LCSH

Cataloging / Study and teaching

Subject

Cataloging / Study and teaching

0.06850691 = product of:
  0.13701382 = sum of:
    0.13701382 = sum of:
      0.08792751 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 4849) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08792751 = score(doc=4849,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051756795 = queryNorm
          0.43106002 = fieldWeight in 4849, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4849)
      0.049086317 = weight(_text_:22 in 4849) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.049086317 = score(doc=4849,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18124348 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051756795 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4849, 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=4849)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Typographical errors in bibliographic records can cause retrieval problems in online catalogs. This study examined one hundred typographical errors in records in the OCLC WorldCat database. The local catalogs of five libraries holding the items described by the bibliographic records with typographical errors were searched to determine whether each library had corrected the errors. The study found that only 35.8 percent of the errors had been corrected. Knowledge of copy cataloging error rates can help underscore the importance of quality data in bibliographic utilities and, further, can serve as an indication to libraries whether they need to pay more attention to correcting types in the copy cataloging process.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.06850691 = product of:
  0.13701382 = sum of:
    0.13701382 = sum of:
      0.08792751 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 127) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08792751 = score(doc=127,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051756795 = queryNorm
          0.43106002 = fieldWeight in 127, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=127)
      0.049086317 = weight(_text_:22 in 127) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.049086317 = score(doc=127,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18124348 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051756795 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 127, 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=127)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Scholars have long noted the significance of Allegheny College's special collections to American cultural and educational history. Special collections have value to colleges and universities as publicity devices to draw scholars, students, and funding to the institution. Catalogers have an important role to play in marketing the library and the college through improved bibliographic access to these collections. Rare book and manuscript cataloging presents many challenges to catalogers, especially at smaller institutions. This report traces the evolution of Allegheny College's catalog, from book format in 1823, through card format, and finally to online. It also explores the bibliographic challenges created as the library moved from one format to another.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.06850691 = product of:
  0.13701382 = sum of:
    0.13701382 = sum of:
      0.08792751 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 2285) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08792751 = score(doc=2285,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051756795 = queryNorm
          0.43106002 = fieldWeight in 2285, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2285)
      0.049086317 = weight(_text_:22 in 2285) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.049086317 = score(doc=2285,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18124348 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051756795 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2285, 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=2285)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The Joint Steering Committee for the Revision of the Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules, to be known as Resource Description and Access (RDA), has indicated that the replacement for the Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules (AACR2) will allow the use of family names as authors and will provide rules for their formation. This paper discusses what a family name describes; examines how information seekers look for family names and what they expect to find; describes the ways in which family names have been established in Anglo-American cataloging and archival traditions; asks how adequately the headings established under these rules help users seek such information; and suggests how revised cataloging rules might better enable users to identify resources that meet their needs.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.06718283 = product of:
  0.13436566 = sum of:
    0.13436566 = sum of:
      0.099304006 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 189) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.099304006 = score(doc=189,freq=10.0), product of:
          0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051756795 = queryNorm
          0.48683268 = fieldWeight in 189, product of:
            3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
              10.0 = termFreq=10.0
            3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=189)
      0.035061657 = weight(_text_:22 in 189) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.035061657 = score(doc=189,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18124348 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051756795 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 189, 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=189)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The past, present, and future development of AACR2 (Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules) is outlined with particular emphasis on the directions provided by the International Conference on the Principles and Future Development of AACR held in Toronto in October 1997. International cooperation as a significant element in the development and future of the code was highlighted. The Toronto conference, an invitational meeting attended by 65 cataloging experts, was undertaken by the Joint Steering Committee (JSC) as part of its ongoing mandate to respond to changing needs. Among the actions and recommendations resulting from the conference, the following were approved by JSC for immediate action: develop a mission statement for JSC; create a list of the principles of AACR2; pursue the recommendation that a logical analysis of the principles and structure on which AACR2 is based be undertaken; establish an AACR Web site; determine whether there are surveys on the use of AACR2 outside the Anglo-American community, and if no such survey exists, conduct such a survey; formulate the recommendations on serials endorsed during the conference and introduce them into the revision process; publicize and reaffirm JSC policies, procedures, activities, and the current process for submitting rule revision proposals; and solicit a proposal to revise rule 0.24. The international conference has helped JSC to develop a plan of action, which will test the applicability of AACR in current and future environments and balance the need for a sound and workable cataloging code with the cost of cataloging and change.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

Footnote

Beitrag in einem Themenheft "What in the World...Cataloging on an International Scale": papers from the ALCTS preconference, June 26, 1998 "What in the World...Cataloging on an International Scale". ALCTS Preconference, Washington, D.C.

0.063577406 = product of:
  0.12715481 = sum of:
    0.12715481 = sum of:
      0.07105616 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 126) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07105616 = score(doc=126,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051756795 = queryNorm
          0.3483491 = fieldWeight in 126, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=126)
      0.05609865 = weight(_text_:22 in 126) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05609865 = score(doc=126,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18124348 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051756795 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 126, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=126)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.058720212 = product of:
  0.117440425 = sum of:
    0.117440425 = sum of:
      0.07536644 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 163) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07536644 = score(doc=163,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051756795 = queryNorm
          0.36948 = fieldWeight in 163, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=163)
      0.042073987 = weight(_text_:22 in 163) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042073987 = score(doc=163,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18124348 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051756795 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 163, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=163)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Efficiency and effectiveness of technical services units are difficult to measure, analyze, and compare, partly because operations are complex and vary substantially from one library to another. Cost studies have been widely conducted as a means of measuring the cost efficiency of specific technical services tasks. Since data on costs are not necessarily comparable among institutions, other quantifiable measures of efficiency and effectiveness would enhance managerial decision-making. This article reports the analysis of data compiled from a survey of twenty-six academic libraries. It seeks to supplement the findings of cost studies by providing measures of efficiency and effectiveness for cataloging departments based on reported productivity, number of staff, task distribution, and quality measures such as backlogs, authority control, and database maintenance. Benchmark productivity levels for six libraries with best practices are identified.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.058720212 = product of:
  0.117440425 = sum of:
    0.117440425 = sum of:
      0.07536644 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07536644 = score(doc=188,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051756795 = queryNorm
          0.36948 = fieldWeight in 188, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=188)
      0.042073987 = weight(_text_:22 in 188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042073987 = score(doc=188,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18124348 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051756795 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 188, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=188)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

Footnote

Beitrag in einem Themenheft "What in the World...Cataloging on an International Scale": papers from the ALCTS preconference, June 26, 1998 "What in the World...Cataloging on an International Scale". ALCTS Preconference, Washington, D.C.

0.055991102 = product of:
  0.111982204 = sum of:
    0.111982204 = sum of:
      0.07692055 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 191) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07692055 = score(doc=191,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051756795 = queryNorm
          0.37709895 = fieldWeight in 191, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=191)
      0.035061657 = weight(_text_:22 in 191) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.035061657 = score(doc=191,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18124348 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051756795 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 191, 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=191)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

International efforts to provide authority control include the work of IFLA, the AUTHOR Project funded by the European Commission, and related work conducted under the auspices of the ICA/CDS. IFLA developed the guidelines Form and Structure of Corporate Headings, documented the formulation of names along the lines of national origin in its publication Names of Persons, and published Guidelines for Authority and Reference Entries. Attention has shifted from a single authority record for each entity that would be shared internationally through the exchange of records to linking parallel authority records for the same entity. The access control of the future will account for difference in cataloging rules, transliteration standards, and cultural differences within the same language as well as for the need for different languages and scripts and will enable users to display the script and form of a heading that they expect. Project AUTHOR is a shared set of resource national authority files that used selections from the authority files of France, the United Kingdom, Spain, Portugal, and Belgium. The prototype tested an adaptation of Z39.50 server software for authority records and displays for user interface. An international standard for authority control records has been developed for corporate bodies, persons, and families. Through joint meetings efforts have been synchronized to develop authority control at the international level.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

Footnote

Beitrag in einem Themenheft "What in the World...Cataloging on an International Scale": papers from the ALCTS preconference, June 26, 1998 "What in the World...Cataloging on an International Scale". ALCTS Preconference, Washington, D.C.

0.05563023 = product of:
  0.11126046 = sum of:
    0.11126046 = sum of:
      0.06217414 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 151) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06217414 = score(doc=151,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051756795 = queryNorm
          0.30480546 = fieldWeight in 151, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=151)
      0.049086317 = weight(_text_:22 in 151) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.049086317 = score(doc=151,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18124348 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051756795 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 151, 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=151)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.048933513 = product of:
  0.09786703 = sum of:
    0.09786703 = sum of:
      0.06280537 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 153) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06280537 = score(doc=153,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051756795 = queryNorm
          0.3079 = fieldWeight in 153, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=153)
      0.035061657 = weight(_text_:22 in 153) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.035061657 = score(doc=153,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18124348 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051756795 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 153, 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=153)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

In January 1999, the Program for Cooperative Cataloging approved the core bibliographic standard for rare books, called the DCRB Core standard. Like the other core standards, the DCRB Core provides the framework within which catalogers can create bibliographic records that are less than full, but are as reliable as full-level records in description and authorized headings. In the three years since its approval, there is little evidence that the standard has been widely used. This study reports the results of a survey sent to forty-three participants who indicated in a preliminary query that they do use the DCRB Core or that they have made the decision not to use it. In the thirty-seven surveys that were returned, only about 16% of the respondents said they have used the standard to create bibliographic records for their rare books. The libraries that do not use the core standard find it inferior or lacking in a number of ways. Several of those libraries, however, are planning to use the standard in the future or are seriously planning to investigate using it. Such intent may indicate that the time is approaching when more libraries will find reasons to implement the standard. One impetus may come from the findings of a recent survey of the special collections departments of member libraries of the Association of Research Libraries that emphasize the size of the backlogs in those departments. If faster accessibility to specific portions of the backlogs would benefit users more than having fulllevel cataloging, application of the DCRB Core standard could facilitate reducing those backlogs.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.048933513 = product of:
  0.09786703 = sum of:
    0.09786703 = sum of:
      0.06280537 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 187) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06280537 = score(doc=187,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051756795 = queryNorm
          0.3079 = fieldWeight in 187, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=187)
      0.035061657 = weight(_text_:22 in 187) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.035061657 = score(doc=187,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18124348 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051756795 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 187, 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=187)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

Footnote

Beitrag in einem Themenheft "What in the World...Cataloging on an International Scale": papers from the ALCTS preconference, June 26, 1998 "What in the World...Cataloging on an International Scale". ALCTS Preconference, Washington, D.C.

0.047683053 = product of:
  0.095366105 = sum of:
    0.095366105 = sum of:
      0.053292118 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 130) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.053292118 = score(doc=130,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051756795 = queryNorm
          0.26126182 = fieldWeight in 130, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=130)
      0.042073987 = weight(_text_:22 in 130) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042073987 = score(doc=130,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18124348 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051756795 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 130, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=130)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

A solid theoretical foundation has been built over the years exploring the bibliographic work and developing cataloging rules and practices to describe the work in the traditional catalog. With the increasing prevalence of multiple manifestations of serial titles, as well as tools that automate discovery and retrieval, bibliographic control of serials at a higher level of abstraction is more necessary than ever before. At the same time, models such as the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions' Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records offer new opportunities to control all bibliographic entities at this higher level and build more useful catalog displays. The bibliographic mechanisms that control the work for monographs - author, title, and uniform title - are weak identifiers for serials. New identifiers being adopted by the content industry are built on models and practices that are fundamentally different from those underlying the new bibliographic models. What is needed is a work identifier for serials that is both congruent with the new models and can enable us to meet the objective of providing work-level access to all resources in our catalogs.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.047683053 = product of:
  0.095366105 = sum of:
    0.095366105 = sum of:
      0.053292118 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 136) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.053292118 = score(doc=136,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051756795 = queryNorm
          0.26126182 = fieldWeight in 136, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=136)
      0.042073987 = weight(_text_:22 in 136) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042073987 = score(doc=136,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18124348 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051756795 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 136, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=136)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Bibliographic relationships have taken on even greater importance in the context of ongoing efforts to integrate concepts from the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) into cataloging codes and database structures. In MARC 21, the linking entry fields are a major mechanism for expressing relationships between bibliographic records. Taxonomies of bibliographic relationships have been proposed by Tillett, with an extension by Smiraglia, and in FRBR itself. The present exercise is to provide a detailed bidirectional mapping of the MARC 21 linking fields to these two schemes. The correspondence of the Tillett taxonomic divisions to the MARC categorization of the linking fields as chronological, horizontal, or vertical is examined as well. Application of the findings to MARC format development and system functionality is discussed.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.047683053 = product of:
  0.095366105 = sum of:
    0.095366105 = sum of:
      0.053292118 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 183) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.053292118 = score(doc=183,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051756795 = queryNorm
          0.26126182 = fieldWeight in 183, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=183)
      0.042073987 = weight(_text_:22 in 183) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042073987 = score(doc=183,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18124348 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051756795 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 183, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=183)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

OCLC has grown from the original group of Ohio academic libraries to 27,000 libraries located in North America, Europe, Asia, Latin American, and South Africa. Each of the records in WorldCat (the OCLC Online Union Catalog) is a local creation that is available for use across the globe for different purposes. Common issues that must be faced with the expansion of a bibliographic utility include cataloging standards, subject access in languages appropriate to the user, local needs versus global usefulness, and character sets. Progress has been made with the cooperative creation of an international name authority file and the uniform application of ISBD principles. A method of linking various subject vocabularies and an improved infrastructure of MARC formats and character sets are needed. Librarians need new automated tools to provide preliminary access to date available in electronic form and to assist them in organizing and storing that data.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22