Search (35 results, page 1 of 2)

  • × theme_ss:"Formalerschließung"
  • × year_i:[2010 TO 2020}
  1. Stalberg, E.; Cronin, C.: Assessing the cost and value of bibliographic control (2011) 0.04 
    0.03896099 = product of:
  0.116882965 = sum of:
    0.116882965 = sum of:
      0.07448605 = weight(_text_:2009 in 2592) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07448605 = score(doc=2592,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.20749448 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.6415744 = idf(docFreq=1158, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04470347 = queryNorm
          0.35897845 = fieldWeight in 2592, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.6415744 = idf(docFreq=1158, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2592)
      0.042396918 = weight(_text_:22 in 2592) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042396918 = score(doc=2592,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15654393 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04470347 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2592, 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=2592)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    In June 2009, the Association for Library Collections and Technical Services Heads of Technical Services in Large Research Libraries Interest Group established the Task Force on Cost/Value Assessment of Bibliographic Control to address recommendation 5.1.1.1 of On the Record: Report of the Library of Congress Working Group on the Future of Bibliographic Control, which focused on developing measures for costs, benefits, and value of bibliographic control. This paper outlines results of that task force's efforts to develop and articulate metrics for evaluating the cost and value of cataloging activities specifically, and offers some next steps that the community could take to further the profession's collective understanding of the costs and values associated with bibliographic control.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  2. Deutsche Nationalbibliothek: Neue Veröffentlichungen im Bereich Regelwerke : 6. RSWK-Ergänzungslieferun / Aktualisierung der RAK-Musik-Anlage M 9 und der RAK-WB-Anlage 5.2 (2010) 0.02 
    0.018430518 = product of:
  0.055291552 = sum of:
    0.055291552 = product of:
      0.110583104 = sum of:
        0.110583104 = weight(_text_:2009 in 3501) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.110583104 = score(doc=3501,freq=24.0), product of:
            0.20749448 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6415744 = idf(docFreq=1158, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04470347 = queryNorm
            0.5329448 = fieldWeight in 3501, product of:
              4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
                24.0 = termFreq=24.0
              4.6415744 = idf(docFreq=1158, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3501)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek hat die 6. RSWK-Ergänzungslieferung zur 3., überarbeiteten und erweiterten Auflage der »Regeln für den Schlagwortkatalog (RSWK)« und die Aktualisierung 2009 der RAK-Musik-Anlage M 9 sowie die Aktualisierung RAK-WB-Anlage 5.2 »Transliteration der griechischen Buchstaben« veröffentlicht.
    Content
    Außerdem wurde Paragraf 106 dahingehend geändert, dass in Zukunft der Homonymenzusatz bei Personen nur eine der SWD zu entnehmende Bezeichnung sein soll; die Unterscheidung von engen und weiten Berufsbezeichnungen mit einer zugelassenen Liste wird aufgegeben. In Paragraf 731 wird hinsichtlich der Kirchenbauten präzisiert, welche Bezeichnungen als Individualnamen gelten. Die Expertengruppe Sacherschließung hat die Änderungen an den RSWK auf ihren Sitzungen am 20. April 2009 beziehungsweise 16. November 2009 beschlossen. Der Standardisierungsausschuss hat auf seiner 18. Sitzung am 25. November 2009 einer Veröffentlichung und Inkraftsetzung zum 1. Januar 2010 zugestimmt. Die Anpassungen des Regelwerks, die sich aus den geänderten Paragrafen 13 bis 15 ergeben, werden Anfang dieses Jahres veröffentlicht. Die Papierausgabe des Grundwerks in der 3., überarbeiteten und erweiterten Auflage sowie die 1. bis 4. Ergänzungslieferung der »Regeln für den Schlagwortkatalog« können Sie beziehen über die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek, Bibliografische Dienste, Adickesallee 1, 60322 Frankfurt am Main, Fax: 069/15 25-16 36, E-Mail: c.junker@d-nb.de Die 5. Ergänzungslieferung steht in elektronischer Form unter der oben genannten Website zur Verfügung.
    Aktualisierung 2009 der RAK-Musik-Anlage M 9 Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek hat auf ihrer Website die Aktualisierung 2009 der RAKMusik-Anlage M 9 »Maßgebliche Werkverzeichnisse und Zählweise der Werke in Einheitssachtiteln« in elektronischer Form veröffentlicht. Diese Aktualisierung steht kostenfrei zur Verfügung: www.d-nb.de/standardisierung/ pdf/rak_musik_m9_2009.pdf Der Standardisierungsausschuss hat in seiner 18. Sitzung am 25. November 2009 der Veröffentlichung und Inkraftsetzung der aktualisierten Anlage zugestimmt. Für die Aktualisierung 2009 wurden Werkverzeichnisse für Edvard Grieg, Jan Krtitel Vanhal und Felix Mendelssohn Bartholdy neu aufgenommen. Die Aktualisierung 2009 ersetzt jene von 2008. Die Anlage M 9 wird jährlich aktualisiert. Die Arbeitsstelle für Standardisierung nimmt Vorschläge hierfür gerne entgegen.
    Aktualisierung RAK-WBAnlage 5.2 »Transliteration der griechischen Buchstaben« Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek hat auf ihrer Website die Aktualisierung RAK-WBAnlage 5.2 »Transliteration der griechischen Buchstaben« in elektronischer Form veröffentlicht. Unter www.d-nb.de/standardisierung/p df/rak_wb_anlage_ 5_2.pdf steht diese Aktualisierung kostenfrei zur Verfügung. Die DIN 31634 (Information und Dokumentation - Umschrift des griechischen Alphabets) ist im Juni 2009 erschienen und ersetzt die Version aus dem Jahr 1982. Die Norm wurde vom Normenausschuss Bibliotheks- und Dokumentationswesen, Arbeitsausschuss NABD 1 »Transliteration und Transkription«, erarbeitet. Sie schreibt das in ihr festgeschriebene Umschriftsystem, das seinen Ursprung in einer langen wissenschaftlichen Praxis hat, kontinuierlich fort.
    Eine inhaltliche Veränderung hat nur die Vorgabe zur Umschrift des Spiritus asper erfahren, die sprachlich deutlicher abgefasst wurde und damit keinen Spielraum mehr für unterschiedliche Interpretationen lassen soll. Darüber hinaus wurde die Norm hauptsächlich redakDie DIN 31634 (Information und Dokumentation - Umschrift des griechischen Alphabets) ist im Juni 2009 erschienen und ersetzt die Version aus dem Jahr 1982. tionell überarbeitet und modernisiert. Mit der DIN 31634 hat der NABD erstmals eine Norm nach seinen neuen Grundsätzen für die inhaltliche Gestaltung veröffentlicht, die eine Integrierung der Unicode Werte für sämtliche nichtlateinische Schriftzeichen beinhalten. Die Norm kann über den BeuthVerlag bezogen werden. Als formale Voraussetzung für die Anwendung der revidierten Norm ist eine Aktualisierung des Regelwerkstextes notwendig. Derzeit ist in der Anlage 5.2 (Transliteration der griechischen Buchstaben) der RAK-WB die komplette Umschrifttabelle enthalten. Aus Copyright-Gründen ist es jedoch nicht mehr möglich, die Norm im Regelwerk abzudrucken. Der Standardisierungsausschuss hat in seiner 18. Sitzung am 25. November 2009 der Veröffentlichung und Inkraftsetzung der geänderten Anlage zugestimmt.
  3. Arsenault, C.; Noruzi, A.: Analysis of work-to-work bibliographic relationships through FRBR : a Canadian perspective (2012) 0.02 
    0.01755653 = product of:
  0.05266959 = sum of:
    0.05266959 = product of:
      0.10533918 = sum of:
        0.10533918 = weight(_text_:2009 in 1923) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10533918 = score(doc=1923,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.20749448 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6415744 = idf(docFreq=1158, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04470347 = queryNorm
            0.5076722 = fieldWeight in 1923, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.6415744 = idf(docFreq=1158, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1923)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    The purpose of this study is to investigate the characteristics of Canadian publications by analyzing their bibliographic relationships based on the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) model. The study indicates frequencies of occurrence of work-to-work bibliographic relationships for manifestations published in 2009 and catalogued in the AMICUS online catalogue. The results show that approximately 4.4 percent of the 2009 bibliographic records in the AMICUS catalogue exhibit a work-to-work bibliographic relationship.
  4. Genetasio, G.: ¬The International Cataloguing Principles and their future", in: JLIS.it 3/1 (2012) (2012) 0.02 
    0.0150484545 = product of:
  0.045145363 = sum of:
    0.045145363 = product of:
      0.090290725 = sum of:
        0.090290725 = weight(_text_:2009 in 2625) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.090290725 = score(doc=2625,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.20749448 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6415744 = idf(docFreq=1158, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04470347 = queryNorm
            0.43514758 = fieldWeight in 2625, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.6415744 = idf(docFreq=1158, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2625)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    The article aims to provide an update on the 2009 Statement of International Cataloguing Principles (ICP) and on the status of work on the Statement by the IFLA Cataloguing Section. The article begins with a summary of the drafting process of the ICP by the IME ICC, International Meeting of Experts on an International Cataloguing Code, focusing in particular on the first meeting (IME ICC1) and on the earlier drafts of the 2009 Statement. It then analyzes both the major innovations and the unsatisfactory aspects of the ICP. Finally, it explains and comments on the recent documents by the IFLA Cataloguing Section relating to the ICP, which express their intention to revise the Statement and to verify the convenience of drawing up an international cataloguing code. The latter intention is considered in detail and criticized by the author in the light of the recent publication of the RDA, Resource Description and Access. The article is complemented by an updated bibliography on the ICP.
  5. Heron, S.J.; Simpson, B.; Weiss, A.K.; Phillips, J.: Merging catalogs : creating a shared bibliographic environment for the State University Libraries of Florida (2013) 0.01 
    0.012414342 = product of:
  0.037243024 = sum of:
    0.037243024 = product of:
      0.07448605 = sum of:
        0.07448605 = weight(_text_:2009 in 1942) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07448605 = score(doc=1942,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.20749448 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6415744 = idf(docFreq=1158, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04470347 = queryNorm
            0.35897845 = fieldWeight in 1942, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.6415744 = idf(docFreq=1158, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1942)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    The eleven state universities of Florida have long shared an integrated library system architecture, but maintained separate databases. In 2009 the deans and directors of the eleven state university libraries tasked the three largest libraries to investigate the feasibility of combining all catalogs into a single bibliographic entity. With the help of a central utomation group, the three successfully negotiated the fine line between sharing data and retaining the unique work created by each of the three libraries. The groundwork laid in this initiative should prove valuable to other libraries seeking to centralize functions and pool resources.
  6. Smiraglia, R.P.: ¬A research agenda for cataloging : the CCQ Editorial Board responds to the Year of Cataloging Research (2010) 0.01 
    0.010640863 = product of:
  0.03192259 = sum of:
    0.03192259 = product of:
      0.06384518 = sum of:
        0.06384518 = weight(_text_:2009 in 4162) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06384518 = score(doc=4162,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.20749448 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6415744 = idf(docFreq=1158, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04470347 = queryNorm
            0.3076958 = fieldWeight in 4162, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.6415744 = idf(docFreq=1158, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4162)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    The cataloging and classification community was called to highlight 2010 as "The Year of Cataloging Research," and specifically was challenged to generate research ideas, conduct research, and generally promote the development of new research in cataloging. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly has become the most influential journal of research in cataloging and classification since its inception in 1981. The idea behind the research reported here was to give the CCQ editorial board an opportunity to present its point of view about research for cataloging. A Delphi study was conducted in three stages during the 2009-2010 academic year. Members were asked to define the key terms "cataloging," "evidence," and "research," and to develop a research agenda in cataloging. The results reveal a basic core definition of cataloging perceived as a dynamic, active process at the core of information retrieval. An eight point research agenda emerges that is forward-looking and embraces change, along with top-ranked calls for new empirical evidence about catalogs, cataloging, and catalog users.
  7. Kasprzik, A.: Vorläufer der Internationalen Katalogisierungsprinzipien (2014) 0.01 
    0.010640863 = product of:
  0.03192259 = sum of:
    0.03192259 = product of:
      0.06384518 = sum of:
        0.06384518 = weight(_text_:2009 in 1619) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06384518 = score(doc=1619,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.20749448 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6415744 = idf(docFreq=1158, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04470347 = queryNorm
            0.3076958 = fieldWeight in 1619, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.6415744 = idf(docFreq=1158, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1619)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    Für eine korrekte und zielführende Formalerschließung lassen sich drei Ebenen von Leitlinien definieren: Zielsetzungen, Prinzipien und Regeln der Katalogisierung. Der vorliegende Artikel befasst sich hauptsächlich mit den (möglichen) Zielsetzungen und Prinzipien der Katalogisierung. In der Einleitung der im Jahr 2009 herausgegebenen "Erklärung zu den Internationalen Katalogisierungsprinzipien" (ICP) ist vermerkt, dass die dort vorgelegte Prinzipiensammlung aufbaut auf "den großen Katalogtraditionen der Welt". Diese Traditionen werden dann mit drei Referenzen aus der frühen Fachliteratur belegt: Den Schriften von Charles A. Cutter (1904), Shiyali R. Ranganathan (1955) und Seymour Lubetzky (1969). In diesem Artikel werden nach einem kurzen chronologischen Überblick die drei genannten Publikationen und insbesondere die darin enthaltenen Feststellungen zu Sinn und Zweck von international einheitlichen Prinzipien für die bibliothekarische Formalerschließung in ihren geschichtlichen Kontext eingeordnet und ihr jeweiliger Einfluss auf die diversen existierenden Formulierungen von Zielen und Prinzipien näher beleuchtet. Außerdem werden einige bemerkenswert moderne Gedankengänge in den betreffenden Schriften aufgezeigt. Ein abschließendes Fazit fasst die wichtigsten Zielsetzungen und Prinzipien der Katalogisierung noch einmal mit Bezug auf die verwendete Literatur zur Theorie der Informationsorganisation zusammen.
  8. LeBoeuf, P.: ¬A strange model named FRBRoo (2012) 0.01 
    0.010640863 = product of:
  0.03192259 = sum of:
    0.03192259 = product of:
      0.06384518 = sum of:
        0.06384518 = weight(_text_:2009 in 1904) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06384518 = score(doc=1904,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.20749448 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6415744 = idf(docFreq=1158, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04470347 = queryNorm
            0.3076958 = fieldWeight in 1904, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.6415744 = idf(docFreq=1158, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1904)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    Libraries and museums developed rules for the description of their collections prior to formalizing the underlying conceptualization reflected in such rules. That formalizing process took place in the 1990s and resulted in two independent conceptual models: FRBR for bibliographic information (published in 1998), and CIDOC CRM for museum information (developed from 1996 on, and issued as ISO standard 21127 in 2006). An international working group was formed in 2003 with the purpose of harmonizing these two models. The resulting model, FRBROO, was published in 2009. It is an extension to CIDOC CRM, using the formalism in which the former is written. It adds to FRBR the dynamic aspects of CIDOC CRM, and a number of refinements (e.g. in the definitions of Work and Manifestation). Some modifications were made in CIDOC CRM as well. FRBROO was developed with Semantic Web technologies in mind, and lends itself well to the Linked Data environment; but will it be used in that context?
  9. Poulter, A.: Filling in the blanks in RDA or remaining blank? : the strange case of FRSAD (2013) 0.01 
    0.010032304 = product of:
  0.030096909 = sum of:
    0.030096909 = product of:
      0.060193818 = sum of:
        0.060193818 = weight(_text_:2009 in 980) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.060193818 = score(doc=980,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.20749448 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6415744 = idf(docFreq=1158, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04470347 = queryNorm
            0.2900984 = fieldWeight in 980, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.6415744 = idf(docFreq=1158, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=980)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    RDA (Resource Description and Access) was released in July 2010, and made available for use, either in an online form, the RDA Toolkit (http://beta.rdatoolkit.gvpi.net/) or in printed form, in a large loose-leaf binder. In July 2011, the Library of Congress, the National Library of Medicine, and the National Agricultural Library announced the decision to adopt RDA after conducting trials. The decision to adopt RDA though carried riders on certain perceived issues to be resolved, related to rules readability, online delivery issues of the RDA Toolkit and a business case outlining costs and benefits of adoption. It appears though that, allowing for these issues to be dealt with, RDA will begin adoption in 2013 and will gradually replace the aged AACR2 (Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules, Second Edition). Unlike AACR2, RDA was intended to also provide subject access. As RDA currently stands, Chapters 12-16, 23, 33-37 are intended to establish guidelines for providing subject access, but only Chapter 16, 'Identifying Places' is complete.. This paper will outline possible strategies for moving forward in completing the remaining blank chapters, based on the model given in the recent Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data (IFLA Working Group, 2010), here-after referred to as FRSAD. This paper begins by outlining significant developments prior to the appearance of FRSAD which was formerly known as FRSAR. This involves coverage of the two preceding reports, the Functional Requirements of Bibliographic Records (FRBR, IFLA 2008) and the Functional Requirements for Authority Data (FRAD, IFLA 2009), which was formerly known as FRANAR. The final version of FRSAD, released in 2009, will be contrasted to earlier efforts to extend the FRBR/FRAD models to fully cover subject access. Finally, a prospective proposal to take FRSAD forward to implementation using PRECIS (Preserved Context Indexing System) will be examined, as well as the general reception of FRSAD.
  10. Agnese Galeffi, A.; Bertolini, M.V.; Bothmann, R.L.; Rodríguez, E.E.; McGarry, D.: Statement of International Cataloguing Principles (ICP) 2016 (2016) 0.01 
    0.010032304 = product of:
  0.030096909 = sum of:
    0.030096909 = product of:
      0.060193818 = sum of:
        0.060193818 = weight(_text_:2009 in 3284) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.060193818 = score(doc=3284,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.20749448 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6415744 = idf(docFreq=1158, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04470347 = queryNorm
            0.2900984 = fieldWeight in 3284, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.6415744 = idf(docFreq=1158, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3284)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    The original Statement of Principles - commonly known as the "Paris Principles" - was approved by the International Conference on Cataloguing Principles in 1961. Its goal of serving as a basis for international standardization in cataloguing has certainly been achieved: most of the cataloguing codes that were developed worldwide since that time have followed the Principles strictly or at least to a high degree. More than fifty years later, having a common set of international cataloguing principles is still necessary as cataloguers and users around the world use online catalogues as search and discovery systems. At the beginning of the 21st century, IFLA produced a new statement of principles (published in 2009) applicable to online library catalogues and beyond. The current version has been reviewed and updated in 2014 and 2015, and approved in 2016. The 2009 Statement of Principles replaced and explicitly broadened the scope of the Paris Principles from just textual resources to all types of resources, and from just the choice and form of entry to all aspects of bibliographic and authority data used in library catalogues. It included not only principles and objectives, but also guiding rules that should be included in cataloguing codes internationally, as well as guidance on search and retrieval capabilities. This 2016 edition takes into consideration new categories of users, the open access environment, the interoperability and the accessibility of data, features of discovery tools and the significant change of user behaviour in general. This statement builds on the great cataloguing traditions of the world, as well as on the conceptual models in the IFLA Functional Requirements family.
  11. Noruzi, A.: FRBR and Tillett's taxonomy of bibliographic relationships (2012) 0.01 
    0.008075604 = product of:
  0.02422681 = sum of:
    0.02422681 = product of:
      0.04845362 = sum of:
        0.04845362 = weight(_text_:22 in 4564) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04845362 = score(doc=4564,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15654393 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04470347 = 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)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Date
    22. 2.2013 11:13:52
  12. Hamm, S.; Schneider, K.: Automatische Erschließung von Universitätsdissertationen (2015) 0.01 
    0.008075604 = product of:
  0.02422681 = sum of:
    0.02422681 = product of:
      0.04845362 = sum of:
        0.04845362 = weight(_text_:22 in 1715) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04845362 = score(doc=1715,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15654393 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04470347 = 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)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Source
    Dialog mit Bibliotheken. 27(2015) H.1, S.18-22
  13. Schaffner, V.: FRBR in MAB2 und Primo - ein kafkaesker Prozess? : Möglichkeiten der FRBRisierung von MAB2-Datensätzen in Primo exemplarisch dargestellt an Datensätzen zu Franz Kafkas "Der Process" (2011) 0.01 
    0.0070939097 = product of:
  0.021281729 = sum of:
    0.021281729 = product of:
      0.042563457 = sum of:
        0.042563457 = weight(_text_:2009 in 907) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042563457 = score(doc=907,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.20749448 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6415744 = idf(docFreq=1158, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04470347 = queryNorm
            0.20513055 = fieldWeight in 907, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.6415744 = idf(docFreq=1158, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=907)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    FRBR (Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records) ist ein logisches Denkmodell für bibliographische Datensätze, welches zur benutzerfreundlicheren Gestaltung von Browsing in Online-Bibliothekskatalogen herangezogen werden kann. Im Österreichischen Bibliothekenverbund (OBV) werden bibliographische Datensätze nach den Regeln für die alphabetische Katalogisierung in wissenschaftlichen Bibliotheken (RAK-WB) erstellt und liegen im Datenformat MAB2 (Maschinelles Austauschformat für Bibliotheken) vor. Mit der Software Primo von Ex Libris, die 2009 implementiert wurde, besteht die Möglichkeit bibliographische Datensätze für die Anzeige neu aufzubereiten. Wie ausgehend von MAB2-Daten eine möglichst FRBR-konforme Datenpräsentation in Primo geleistet werden kann und welche Probleme sich dabei ergeben, ist die zentrale Fragestellung dieser Master Thesis. Exemplarisch dargestellt wird dies anhand von Datensätzen des Österreichischen Bibliothekenverbundes zu Franz Kafkas "Der Process". Im Fokus stehen drei Aspekte, welche im Zusammenhang mit FRBR, MAB2 und Primo als besonders problematisch und diskussionswürdig erscheinen: das Konzept des "Werkes", Expressionen als praxistaugliche Entitäten und Aggregate bzw. mehrbändig begrenzte Werke. Nach einer Einführung in das FRBR-Modell wird versucht einen idealen FRBRBaum zu Kafkas "Der Process" in seinen unterschiedlichen Ausprägungen (Übersetzungen, Verfilmungen, Textvarianten, Aggregate etc.) darzustellen: Schon hier werden erste Grenzen des Modells sichtbar. Daran anschließend werden Datensätze des OBV einer Analyse unterzogen, um die FRBRTauglichkeit von MAB2 und die Möglichkeit der FRBR keys in Primo zu beleuchten. Folgende Einschränkungen wurden deutlich: Die derzeitige Herangehensweise und Praxis der Formalerschließung ist nicht auf FRBR vorbereitet. Die vorliegenden Metadaten sind zu inkonsistent, um ein maschinelles Extrahieren für eine FRBR-konforme Datenpräsentation zu ermöglichen. Die Möglichkeiten des Werkclusterings und der Facettierung in Primo bieten darüber hinaus zwar einen Mehrwert für das Browsing in Trefferlisten, jedoch nur bedingt im FRBR-Sinne.
  14. Riva, P.; Zumer, M.: Introducing the FRBR library reference model (2015) 0.01 
    0.0070939097 = product of:
  0.021281729 = sum of:
    0.021281729 = product of:
      0.042563457 = sum of:
        0.042563457 = weight(_text_:2009 in 2094) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042563457 = score(doc=2094,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.20749448 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.6415744 = idf(docFreq=1158, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04470347 = queryNorm
            0.20513055 = fieldWeight in 2094, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.6415744 = idf(docFreq=1158, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2094)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Abstract
    The FR family of conceptual models has grown to include three separate models prepared independently over many years by different working groups: FRBR for bibliographic data, FRAD for authority data, and FRSAD for subject authority data. Even as FRAD and FRSAD were being finalized in 2009-2010, it became clear that it would be necessary to combine or consolidate the FR family into a single coherent model to clarify the understanding of the overall model and remove barriers to its adoption. The FRBR Review Group has been working towards this since 2011, constituting a Consolidation Editorial Group in 2013. The consolidation task involves not only spelling out how the three existing models fit together, but requires taking a fresh look at the models to incorporate insights gained since their initial publications. This paper, based directly on the work of the Consolidation Editorial Group, provides the first public report of the consolidated model, tentatively referred to as the FRBR-Library Reference Model (FRBR-LRM), and the guiding principles that have been applied in its development.
  15. Taylor, A.G.: Implementing AACR and AACR2 : a personal perspective and lessons learned (2012) 0.01 
    0.007066153 = product of:
  0.021198459 = sum of:
    0.021198459 = product of:
      0.042396918 = sum of:
        0.042396918 = weight(_text_:22 in 2546) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042396918 = score(doc=2546,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15654393 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04470347 = 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)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  16. Chambers, S.; Myall, C.: Cataloging and classification : review of the literature 2007-8 (2010) 0.01 
    0.007066153 = product of:
  0.021198459 = sum of:
    0.021198459 = product of:
      0.042396918 = sum of:
        0.042396918 = weight(_text_:22 in 4309) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042396918 = score(doc=4309,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15654393 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04470347 = 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)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  17. Bloss, M.E.: Testing RDA at Dominican University's Graduate School of Library and Information Science : the students' perspectives (2011) 0.01 
    0.007066153 = product of:
  0.021198459 = sum of:
    0.021198459 = product of:
      0.042396918 = sum of:
        0.042396918 = weight(_text_:22 in 1899) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042396918 = score(doc=1899,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15654393 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04470347 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1899, 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=1899)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Date
    25. 5.2015 18:36:22
  18. Theimer, S.: ¬A cataloger's resolution to become more creative : how and why (2012) 0.01 
    0.007066153 = product of:
  0.021198459 = sum of:
    0.021198459 = product of:
      0.042396918 = sum of:
        0.042396918 = weight(_text_:22 in 1934) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042396918 = score(doc=1934,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15654393 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04470347 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1934, 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=1934)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Date
    29. 5.2015 11:08:22
  19. Knowlton, S.A.: Power and change in the US cataloging community (2014) 0.01 
    0.007066153 = product of:
  0.021198459 = sum of:
    0.021198459 = product of:
      0.042396918 = sum of:
        0.042396918 = weight(_text_:22 in 2599) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042396918 = score(doc=2599,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15654393 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04470347 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2599, 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=2599)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  20. Mugridge, R.L.; Edmunds, J.: Batchloading MARC bibliographic records (2012) 0.01 
    0.007066153 = product of:
  0.021198459 = sum of:
    0.021198459 = product of:
      0.042396918 = sum of:
        0.042396918 = weight(_text_:22 in 2600) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042396918 = score(doc=2600,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15654393 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04470347 = 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)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22

Authors

Languages

  • e 31
  • d 4

Types

  • a 31
  • b 4
  • el 3
  • m 2
  • n 1
  • x 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Classifications