-
Lee, H.-L.; Zhang, L.: Tracing the conceptions and treatment of genre in Anglo-American cataloging (2013)
0.07
0.06581714 = sum of:
0.020894295 = product of:
0.08357718 = sum of:
0.08357718 = weight(_text_:authors in 1961) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08357718 = score(doc=1961,freq=2.0), product of:
0.23704608 = queryWeight, product of:
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.05199731 = queryNorm
0.35257778 = fieldWeight in 1961, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1961)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.044922847 = product of:
0.089845695 = sum of:
0.089845695 = weight(_text_:l in 1961) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.089845695 = score(doc=1961,freq=4.0), product of:
0.20667124 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.05199731 = queryNorm
0.4347276 = fieldWeight in 1961, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1961)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- This study examines the conceptions and treatment of genre in four sets of modern Anglo-American cataloging rules spanning 171 years. Genre-related rules are first identified through "genre(s)," "form(s)," and "type(s)" keyword searches, and manual examination of the contents, then analyzed by level of treatment genre receives and by user tasks, as defined in the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records. While genre is found to be sporadically addressed across the rules, its significance has increased over time. In conclusion, the authors call for a rigorous and functional definition of genre and an integrated approach to genre in cataloging.
-
Mugridge, R.L.; Edmunds, J.: Batchloading MARC bibliographic records (2012)
0.05
0.054206207 = sum of:
0.029548995 = product of:
0.11819598 = sum of:
0.11819598 = weight(_text_:authors in 2600) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11819598 = score(doc=2600,freq=4.0), product of:
0.23704608 = queryWeight, product of:
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.05199731 = queryNorm
0.49862027 = fieldWeight in 2600, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2600)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.024657212 = product of:
0.049314424 = sum of:
0.049314424 = weight(_text_:22 in 2600) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049314424 = score(doc=2600,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18208572 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05199731 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2600, 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=2600)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Research libraries are using batchloading to provide access to many resources that they would otherwise be unable to catalog given the staff and other resources available. To explore how such libraries are managing their batchloading activities, the authors conducted a survey of the Association for Library Collections and Technical Services Directors of Large Research Libraries Interest Group member libraries. The survey addressed staffing, budgets, scope, workflow, management, quality standards, information technology support, collaborative efforts, and assessment of batchloading activities. The authors provide an analysis of the survey results along with suggestions for process improvements and future research.
- Date
- 10. 9.2000 17:38:22
-
Baga, J.; Hoover, L.; Wolverton, R.E.: Online, practical, and free cataloging resources (2013)
0.05
0.04836211 = product of:
0.09672422 = sum of:
0.09672422 = sum of:
0.054454714 = weight(_text_:l in 2603) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.054454714 = score(doc=2603,freq=2.0), product of:
0.20667124 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.05199731 = queryNorm
0.26348472 = fieldWeight in 2603, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2603)
0.042269506 = weight(_text_:22 in 2603) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042269506 = score(doc=2603,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18208572 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05199731 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2603, 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=2603)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 10. 9.2000 17:38:22
-
Martínez-Ávila, D.; Smiraglia, R.; Lee, H.-L.; Fox, M.: What is an author now? (2015)
0.05
0.047397494 = sum of:
0.02924592 = product of:
0.11698368 = sum of:
0.11698368 = weight(_text_:authors in 2321) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11698368 = score(doc=2321,freq=12.0), product of:
0.23704608 = queryWeight, product of:
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.05199731 = queryNorm
0.49350607 = fieldWeight in 2321, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2321)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.018151572 = product of:
0.036303144 = sum of:
0.036303144 = weight(_text_:l in 2321) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036303144 = score(doc=2321,freq=2.0), product of:
0.20667124 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.05199731 = queryNorm
0.17565648 = fieldWeight in 2321, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2321)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to discuss and shed light on the following questions: What is an author? Is it a person who writes? Or, is it, in information, an iconic taxonomic designation (some might say a "classification") for a group of writings that are recognized by the public in some particular way? What does it mean when a search engine, or catalog, asks a user to enter the name of an author? And how does that accord with the manner in which the data have been entered in association with the names of the entities identified with the concept of authorship? Design/methodology/approach - The authors use several cases as bases of phenomenological discourse analysis, combining as best the authors can components of eidetic bracketing (a Husserlian technique for isolating noetic reduction) with Foucauldian discourse analysis. The two approaches are not sympathetic or together cogent, so the authors present them instead as alternative explanations alongside empirical evidence. In this way the authors are able to isolate components of iconic "authorship" and then subsequently engage them in discourse. Findings - An "author" is an iconic name associated with a class of works. An "author" is a role in public discourse between a set of works and the culture that consumes them. An "author" is a role in cultural sublimation, or a power broker in deabstemiation. An "author" is last, if ever, a person responsible for the intellectual content of a published work. The library catalog's attribution of "author" is at odds with the Foucauldian discursive comprehension of the role of an "author." Originality/value - One of the main assets of this paper is the combination of Foucauldian discourse analysis with phenomenological analysis for the study of the "author." The authors turned to Foucauldian discourse analysis to discover the loci of power in the interactions of the public with the named authorial entities. The authors also looked to phenomenological analysis to consider the lived experience of users who encounter the same named authorial entities. The study of the "author" in this combined way facilitated the revelation of new aspects of the role of authorship in search engines and library catalogs.
-
Savoy, J.: Estimating the probability of an authorship attribution (2016)
0.03
0.03253679 = sum of:
0.014924496 = product of:
0.059697986 = sum of:
0.059697986 = weight(_text_:authors in 2937) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.059697986 = score(doc=2937,freq=2.0), product of:
0.23704608 = queryWeight, product of:
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.05199731 = queryNorm
0.25184128 = fieldWeight in 2937, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2937)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.017612295 = product of:
0.03522459 = sum of:
0.03522459 = weight(_text_:22 in 2937) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03522459 = score(doc=2937,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18208572 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05199731 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2937, 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=2937)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- In authorship attribution, various distance-based metrics have been proposed to determine the most probable author of a disputed text. In this paradigm, a distance is computed between each author profile and the query text. These values are then employed only to rank the possible authors. In this article, we analyze their distribution and show that we can model it as a mixture of 2 Beta distributions. Based on this finding, we demonstrate how we can derive a more accurate probability that the closest author is, in fact, the real author. To evaluate this approach, we have chosen 4 authorship attribution methods (Burrows' Delta, Kullback-Leibler divergence, Labbé's intertextual distance, and the naïve Bayes). As the first test collection, we have downloaded 224 State of the Union addresses (from 1790 to 2014) delivered by 41 U.S. presidents. The second test collection is formed by the Federalist Papers. The evaluations indicate that the accuracy rate of some authorship decisions can be improved. The suggested method can signal that the proposed assignment should be interpreted as possible, without strong certainty. Being able to quantify the certainty associated with an authorship decision can be a useful component when important decisions must be taken.
- Date
- 7. 5.2016 21:22:27
-
Koster, L.; Heesakkers, D.: ¬The mobile library catalogue (2013)
0.03
0.031765252 = product of:
0.063530505 = sum of:
0.063530505 = product of:
0.12706101 = sum of:
0.12706101 = weight(_text_:l in 1479) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.12706101 = score(doc=1479,freq=2.0), product of:
0.20667124 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.05199731 = queryNorm
0.6147977 = fieldWeight in 1479, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=1479)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
-
Seeman, D.; Goddard, L.: Preparing the way : creating future compatible cataloging data in a transitional environment (2015)
0.03
0.03009117 = sum of:
0.011939597 = product of:
0.04775839 = sum of:
0.04775839 = weight(_text_:authors in 1881) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04775839 = score(doc=1881,freq=2.0), product of:
0.23704608 = queryWeight, product of:
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.05199731 = queryNorm
0.20147301 = fieldWeight in 1881, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1881)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.018151572 = product of:
0.036303144 = sum of:
0.036303144 = weight(_text_:l in 1881) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.036303144 = score(doc=1881,freq=2.0), product of:
0.20667124 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.05199731 = queryNorm
0.17565648 = fieldWeight in 1881, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1881)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Linked data has dominated the recent discourse in cataloging and metadata. The daily work of the cataloger, however, remains mostly unchanged. This tension is investigated, with a view to reconciling cataloging practice with a linked data future. Aspects of linked data are outlined and a shift in focus in cataloging practice is recommended. Authorities, controlled access points, vocabularies, differentiated values, and local data should be emphasized, and focus should shift from free text fields, keystrokes, punctuation, and aspects of local practice. Through these recommendations, it is argued that catalogers can help prepare the way for the emerging information environment. There exists a tension between the data produced in library catalogues presently and the data requirements of an uncertain future. While Linked Data dominates the theoretical and experimental discussion of the next generation of information discovery, the daily work of the cataloguer remains mostly unchanged. The practice of following standards is essential for cataloguing data, and Resource Description and Access (RDA) attempts to bridge the gap between legacy data and a future where Linked Data is increasingly important. But in this transitional environment, where cataloguers continue to create MARC records in traditional closed library databases, can cataloguers do something more to prepare for the future to make their data smarter and richer? While Linked Data deals with large aggregations of data, how can the daily work of the cataloguer at present be leveraged to positively impact future aggregate data tasks and requirements? In short, what can the present-day cataloguer do to "prepare the way" for future data needs? To investigate, this paper will discuss several key questions. What does the future, particularly Linked Data, require of cataloguing data? What can cataloguers do to "prepare the way" for this future as they produce granular data on a daily basis? To what extent do current standards, including RDA, help to meet future requirements? Is following standards all that is required, or are there forward-facing data principles and practices that should otherwise inform practice? And, finally, to what extent is creating good data a neutral process independent of specific current or future technologies? The authors will examine these issues in reference to existing data quality models proposed within and outside of the cataloguing literature. Practical suggestions for current cataloguing production practice will be made based on the future needs outlined.
-
Sandberg, J.; Jin, Q.: How should catalogers provide authority control for journal article authors? : Name identifiers in the linked data world (2016)
0.02
0.018094992 = product of:
0.036189985 = sum of:
0.036189985 = product of:
0.14475994 = sum of:
0.14475994 = weight(_text_:authors in 5138) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.14475994 = score(doc=5138,freq=6.0), product of:
0.23704608 = queryWeight, product of:
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.05199731 = queryNorm
0.61068267 = fieldWeight in 5138, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5138)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- This article suggests that catalogers can provide authority control for authors of journal articles by linking to external international authority databases. It explores the representation of article authors from three disciplines in four databases: International Standard Name Identifier (ISNI), Open Researcher and Contributor ID (ORCID), Scopus, and Virtual International Authority File (VIAF). VIAF and Scopus are particularly promising databases for journal author names, but we believe that a combination of several name databases holds more promise than relying on a single database. We provide examples of RDF links between bibliographic description and author identifiers, including a partial BIBFRAME 2.0 description.
-
Bénauda, C.-L.; Bordeianu, S.: OCLC's WorldShare Management Services : a brave new world for catalogers (2015)
0.02
0.015882626 = product of:
0.031765252 = sum of:
0.031765252 = product of:
0.063530505 = sum of:
0.063530505 = weight(_text_:l in 2617) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.063530505 = score(doc=2617,freq=2.0), product of:
0.20667124 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.05199731 = queryNorm
0.30739886 = fieldWeight in 2617, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2617)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
-
Santana Silva, A.C.; Duarte Ferreira, T.; Azevedo Martins, L. de: Development and challenges in old manuscripts cataloging : the experience of the National Library of Portugal (2016)
0.02
0.015882626 = product of:
0.031765252 = sum of:
0.031765252 = product of:
0.063530505 = sum of:
0.063530505 = weight(_text_:l in 5124) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.063530505 = score(doc=5124,freq=2.0), product of:
0.20667124 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.05199731 = queryNorm
0.30739886 = fieldWeight in 5124, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5124)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
-
Noruzi, A.: FRBR and Tillett's taxonomy of bibliographic relationships (2012)
0.01
0.014089836 = product of:
0.028179672 = sum of:
0.028179672 = product of:
0.056359343 = sum of:
0.056359343 = weight(_text_:22 in 4564) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056359343 = score(doc=4564,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18208572 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05199731 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4564, 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=4564)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 22. 2.2013 11:13:52
-
Hamm, S.; Schneider, K.: Automatische Erschließung von Universitätsdissertationen (2015)
0.01
0.014089836 = product of:
0.028179672 = sum of:
0.028179672 = product of:
0.056359343 = sum of:
0.056359343 = weight(_text_:22 in 1715) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056359343 = score(doc=1715,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18208572 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05199731 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1715, 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=1715)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Dialog mit Bibliotheken. 27(2015) H.1, S.18-22
-
Lopatin, L.: Metadata practices in academic and non-academic libraries for digital projects : a survey (2010)
0.01
0.0136136785 = product of:
0.027227357 = sum of:
0.027227357 = product of:
0.054454714 = sum of:
0.054454714 = weight(_text_:l in 4165) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.054454714 = score(doc=4165,freq=2.0), product of:
0.20667124 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.05199731 = queryNorm
0.26348472 = fieldWeight in 4165, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4165)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
-
Howarth, L.: FRBR and Linked Data : connecting FRBR and Linked Data (2012)
0.01
0.0136136785 = product of:
0.027227357 = sum of:
0.027227357 = product of:
0.054454714 = sum of:
0.054454714 = weight(_text_:l in 1926) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.054454714 = score(doc=1926,freq=2.0), product of:
0.20667124 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.05199731 = queryNorm
0.26348472 = fieldWeight in 1926, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1926)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
-
Maxwell, R.L.: Handbook for RDA : Maxwell's handbook for RDA ; explaining and illustrating RDA: resource description and access using MARC 21 (2013)
0.01
0.0136136785 = product of:
0.027227357 = sum of:
0.027227357 = product of:
0.054454714 = sum of:
0.054454714 = weight(_text_:l in 2085) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.054454714 = score(doc=2085,freq=2.0), product of:
0.20667124 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.05199731 = queryNorm
0.26348472 = fieldWeight in 2085, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2085)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Content
- IntroductionDescribing manifestations and items -- Describing persons -- Describing families -- Describing corporate bodies -- Describing geographic entities -- Describing works -- Describing expressions -- Recording relationships -- Appendix A. Printed books and sheets -- Appendix B. Cartographic resources -- Appendix C. Unpublished manuscripts and manuscript collections -- Appendix D. Notated music -- Appendix E. Audio recordings -- Appendix F. Moving image resources -- Appendix G. Two-dimensional graphic resources -- Appendix H. Three-dimensional resources and objects -- Appendix I. Digital resources -- Appendix J. Microform resources -- Appendix K. Bibliographic records serials and integrating resources -- Appendix L. Analytical description.
-
Smiraglia, R.P.; Lee, H.-L.: Rethinking the authorship principle (2012)
0.01
0.0136136785 = product of:
0.027227357 = sum of:
0.027227357 = product of:
0.054454714 = sum of:
0.054454714 = weight(_text_:l in 5575) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.054454714 = score(doc=5575,freq=2.0), product of:
0.20667124 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.05199731 = queryNorm
0.26348472 = fieldWeight in 5575, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5575)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
-
Pellack, L.J.; Kappmeyer, L.O.: ¬The ripple effect of women's name changes in indexing, citation, and authority control (2011)
0.01
0.012924994 = product of:
0.025849989 = sum of:
0.025849989 = product of:
0.103399955 = sum of:
0.103399955 = weight(_text_:authors in 4347) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.103399955 = score(doc=4347,freq=6.0), product of:
0.23704608 = queryWeight, product of:
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.05199731 = queryNorm
0.43620193 = fieldWeight in 4347, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4347)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- This study investigated name changes of women authors to determine how they were represented in indexes and cited references and identify problem areas. A secondary purpose of the study was to investigate whether or not indexing services were using authority control and how this influenced the search results. The works of eight library science authors who had published under multiple names were examined. The researchers compared author names as they appeared on title pages of publications versus in four online databases and in bibliographies by checking 380 publications and 1,159 citations. Author names were correctly provided 81.22% of the time in indexing services and 90.94% in citation lists. The lowest accuracy (54.55%) occurred when limiting to publications found in Library Literature. The highest accuracy (94.18%) occurred with works published before a surname changed. Author names in indexes and citations correctly matched names on journal articles more often than for any other type of publication. Indexes and citation style manuals treated author names in multiple ways, often altering names substantially from how they appear on the title page. Recommendations are made for changes in editorial styles by indexing services and by the authors themselves to help alleviate future confusion in author name searching.
-
Choi, K.; Yusof, H.M.; Ibrahim, F.: RDA: National Library Board Singapore's learning journey (2014)
0.01
0.012663855 = product of:
0.02532771 = sum of:
0.02532771 = product of:
0.10131084 = sum of:
0.10131084 = weight(_text_:authors in 1984) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.10131084 = score(doc=1984,freq=4.0), product of:
0.23704608 = queryWeight, product of:
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.05199731 = queryNorm
0.42738882 = fieldWeight in 1984, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1984)
0.25 = coord(1/4)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- In May 2012, National Library Board (NLB) Singapore decided to implement Resource Description and Access (RDA) for NLB and targeted its implementation on April 1, 2013. This article presents NLB's RDA journey as it documents and highlights the library's experience in executing RDA in a seamless, systematic approach. The authors share how NLB formulated its implementation strategy and action plan, the adoption and development of the plan, as well as the discussions and milestone decisions made. Based on the Library of Congress' training materials, NLB customized and packaged its training programs to suit the specific needs of NLB staff. NLB also made local decisions needed before cataloging in RDA, communicated its decisions to a user group, and obtained feedback from them. This article also describes the challenges faced, and how NLB overcame them. As RDA is still a work in progress, NLB recognizes that more effort is required to take RDA to the next level. Finally, the authors share NLB's future plans for RDA.
-
Taylor, A.G.: Implementing AACR and AACR2 : a personal perspective and lessons learned (2012)
0.01
0.012328606 = product of:
0.024657212 = sum of:
0.024657212 = product of:
0.049314424 = sum of:
0.049314424 = weight(_text_:22 in 2546) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049314424 = score(doc=2546,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18208572 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05199731 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2546, 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=2546)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 10. 9.2000 17:38:22
-
Chambers, S.; Myall, C.: Cataloging and classification : review of the literature 2007-8 (2010)
0.01
0.012328606 = product of:
0.024657212 = sum of:
0.024657212 = product of:
0.049314424 = sum of:
0.049314424 = weight(_text_:22 in 4309) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049314424 = score(doc=4309,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18208572 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.05199731 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4309, 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=4309)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 10. 9.2000 17:38:22
