Search (52 results, page 1 of 3)

0.09009187 = product of:
  0.1351378 = sum of:
    0.08555462 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 5187) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08555462 = score(doc=5187,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19890657 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051092815 = queryNorm
        0.43012467 = fieldWeight in 5187, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5187)
    0.049583178 = product of:
      0.099166356 = sum of:
        0.099166356 = weight(_text_:classification in 5187) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.099166356 = score(doc=5187,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = queryNorm
            0.6094458 = fieldWeight in 5187, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5187)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

This article provides an interpretation of the structure of classification theory literature, from the late 19th Century to the present, by dividing it into four orders, and then describes the relationship between that and manuals for classification design.

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 56(2018) no.8, S.711-724

0.07976866 = product of:
  0.11965299 = sum of:
    0.0684437 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 292) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0684437 = score(doc=292,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19890657 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051092815 = queryNorm
        0.34409973 = fieldWeight in 292, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=292)
    0.051209286 = product of:
      0.10241857 = sum of:
        0.10241857 = weight(_text_:classification in 292) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10241857 = score(doc=292,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = queryNorm
            0.6294329 = fieldWeight in 292, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=292)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

This paper discusses the historical perspectives of cataloguing and classification practices in Africa and looks at international cataloguing practices and their implications for African librarianship. The challenges facing libraries on the continent in the cataloguing and classification of Africana materials are discussed and some suggestions offered on how the situation may be improved. Efforts towards developments of bibliographic control in Africa are highlighted.

Footnote

Beitrag eines Themenheftes: Historical aspects of cataloging and classification; Part I

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 35(2002) nos.1/2, S.61-78

0.06982237 = product of:
  0.10473356 = sum of:
    0.08469476 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 1995) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08469476 = score(doc=1995,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.19890657 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051092815 = queryNorm
        0.4258017 = fieldWeight in 1995, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1995)
    0.020038802 = product of:
      0.040077604 = sum of:
        0.040077604 = weight(_text_:classification in 1995) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040077604 = score(doc=1995,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = queryNorm
            0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1995, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1995)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

What follows are my memories of the events, starting almost five decades ago, that led to the International Standard for Bibliographic Description (ISBD)-still the most successful and widely used international cataloging standard in history. Many of the documents of the time were little more than ephemera (working papers and the like) and some are not now available to me. I have checked my recollections in all the documents to which I have access and apologize in advance for any errors of time or place. I also apologize for the, alas, unavoidable, given the nature of the essay, many repetitions of the words "I" and "me."

Footnote

Contribution in a special issue "ISBD: The Bibliographic Content Standard "

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 52(2014) no.8, S.821-834

0.06982237 = product of:
  0.10473356 = sum of:
    0.08469476 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 124) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08469476 = score(doc=124,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.19890657 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051092815 = queryNorm
        0.4258017 = fieldWeight in 124, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=124)
    0.020038802 = product of:
      0.040077604 = sum of:
        0.040077604 = weight(_text_:classification in 124) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040077604 = score(doc=124,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = queryNorm
            0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 124, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=124)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

In 1988 the Library of Congress and eight library participants undertook a two-year pilot known as the National Coordinated Cataloging Program (NCCP) to increase the number of quality bibliographic records. Subsequently the Bibliographic Services Study Committee reviewed the pilot. Discussions held at the Library of Congress (LC) and in other fora resulted in the creation of the Cooperative Cataloging Council, and, ultimately, the establishment of the Program for Cooperative Cataloging (PCC) in 1994. The conditions that contributed to a successful approach to shared cataloging are described. The article concludes with considerations for expanding the future effectiveness of the PCC.

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 58(2020) no.3/4, S.190-203

0.06971391 = product of:
  0.104570866 = sum of:
    0.07652238 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 4141) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07652238 = score(doc=4141,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.19890657 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051092815 = queryNorm
        0.3847152 = fieldWeight in 4141, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4141)
    0.028048482 = product of:
      0.056096964 = sum of:
        0.056096964 = weight(_text_:classification in 4141) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.056096964 = score(doc=4141,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = queryNorm
            0.3447546 = fieldWeight in 4141, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4141)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Modelling bibliographical entities is a prominent activity within knowledge organization today. Current models of bibliographic entities, such as Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) and the Bibliographic Framework (BIBFRAME), take inspiration from data-modelling methods developed by computer scientists from the mid-1970s on. Thus, it would seem that the modelling of bibliographic entities is an activity of very recent vintage. However, it is possible to find examples of bibliographical models from earlier periods of knowledge organization. The purpose of this paper is to draw attention to one such model, outlined by the early twentiethcentury British classification theorist E. Wyndham Hulme in his essay on "Principles of Book Classification" (1911-1912). There, Hulme set forth a classification of various attributes by which books can be classified. These he first divided into "accidental" and "inseparable" attributes. Accidental attributes were subdivided into edition-level and copy-level attributes and inseparable attitudes, into "physical" and "non-physical" attributes. Comparison of Hulme's classification of attributes with those of FRBR and BIBFRAME 2.0 reveals that the different classes of attributes in Hulme's classification correspond to groups of attributes associated with different bibliographical entities in those models. These later models assume the existence of different bibliographic entities in an abstract hierarchy among which attributes are distributed, whereas Hulme posited only a single entity-the book-whose various aspects he clustered into different classes of attributes. Thus, Hulme's model offers an interesting alternative to current assumptions about how to conceptualize the relationship between attributes and entities in the bibliographical universe.

0.06432813 = product of:
  0.096492186 = sum of:
    0.0684437 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 3859) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0684437 = score(doc=3859,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.19890657 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051092815 = queryNorm
        0.34409973 = fieldWeight in 3859, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3859)
    0.028048482 = product of:
      0.056096964 = sum of:
        0.056096964 = weight(_text_:classification in 3859) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.056096964 = score(doc=3859,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = queryNorm
            0.3447546 = fieldWeight in 3859, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3859)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Modelling bibliographical entities is a prominent activity within knowledge organization today. Current models of bibliographic entities, such as Functional Requirements for Bibliographical Records (FRBR) and the Bibliographic Framework (BIBFRAME), take inspiration from data - modelling methods developed by computer scientists from the mid - 1970s on. Thus, it would seem that the modelling of bibliographic entities is an activity of very recent vintage. However, it is possible to find examples of bibliographical models from earlier periods of knowledge organization. The purpose of this paper is to draw attention to one such model, outlined by the early 20th - century British classification theorist E. Wyndham Hulme in his essay on "Principles of Book Classification" (1911 - 1912). There, Hulme set forth a classification of various attributes by which books can conceivably be classified. These he first divided into accidental and inseparable attributes. Accidental attributes were subdivided into edition - level and copy - level attributes and inseparable attitudes, into physical and non - physical attributes. Comparison of Hulme's classification of attributes with those of FRBR and BIBFRAME 2.0 reveals that the different classes of attributes in Hulme's classification correspond to groups of attributes associated with different bibliographical entities in those models. These later models assume the existence of different bibliographic entities in an abstraction hierarchy among which attributes are distributed, whereas Hulme posited only a single entity - the book - , whose various aspects he clustered into different classes of attributes. Thus, Hulme's model offers an interesting alternative to current assumptions about how to conceptualize the relationship between attributes and entities in the bibliographical universe.

0.060896795 = product of:
  0.09134519 = sum of:
    0.0684437 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2985) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0684437 = score(doc=2985,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19890657 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051092815 = queryNorm
        0.34409973 = fieldWeight in 2985, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2985)
    0.022901488 = product of:
      0.045802977 = sum of:
        0.045802977 = weight(_text_:classification in 2985) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.045802977 = score(doc=2985,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = queryNorm
            0.28149095 = fieldWeight in 2985, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2985)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

After more than forty-five years of cataloging experience with the Paris Principles and their impact on the international sharing of bibliographic data, the process of replacing them with a wider and deeper set of International Cataloguing Principles is nearing completion. This paper compares the scope, technological context, process of decision-making, conceptual framework, and amount of change involved in the adoption of the two different statements.

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 47(2009) no.6, S.583-599

0.059847753 = product of:
  0.08977163 = sum of:
    0.07259551 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 5667) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07259551 = score(doc=5667,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.19890657 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051092815 = queryNorm
        0.3649729 = fieldWeight in 5667, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5667)
    0.017176118 = product of:
      0.034352235 = sum of:
        0.034352235 = weight(_text_:classification in 5667) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034352235 = score(doc=5667,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = queryNorm
            0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 5667, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5667)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Forty years ago the ICCP in Paris laid the foundations of international co-operation in descriptive cataloging without explicitly speaking of authority control. Some of the factors in the evolution of authority control are the development of catalogs (from card catalog to local automation, to today's OPAC on the Web) and services provided by libraries (from individual service to local users to system networks, to the World Wide Web), as well as international agreements on cataloging (from Paris Principles to the UBC programme, to the report on Mandatory data elements for internationally shared resource authority records). This evolution progressed from the principle of uniform heading to the definition of authority entries and records, and from the responsibility of national bibliographic agencies for the form of the names of their own authors to be shared internationally to the concept of authorized equivalent heading. Some issues of the present state are the persisting differences among national rules and the aim of respecting both local culture and language and international readability.

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 38(2004) nos.3/4, S.xx-xx

0.05881826 = product of:
  0.088227384 = sum of:
    0.059888236 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 5574) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.059888236 = score(doc=5574,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19890657 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051092815 = queryNorm
        0.30108726 = fieldWeight in 5574, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5574)
    0.028339146 = product of:
      0.05667829 = sum of:
        0.05667829 = weight(_text_:classification in 5574) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05667829 = score(doc=5574,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = queryNorm
            0.34832728 = fieldWeight in 5574, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5574)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

The use of computerized cataloguing data requires a commitment on the part of libraries to the standardization of data elements and record formats. Early computerized formats were initiated by several research libraries to serve the needs of particular university systems. In developing MARC, the LoC drew on the experiences of these libraries in establishing a standard acceptable to the research library community for the interchange of bibliographic data. Discusses early computerized formats influencing MARC, the origins of the MARC Pilot Project, and design factors influencing the evolution of the format through MARC2. Research was based on primary sources documenting the early history of MARC, including unpublished documents in the LoC archives

Footnote

Beitrag eines Themenheftes "Cataloging and Classification Standards and Rules"

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 21(1996) nos.3/4, S.75-90

0.05640496 = product of:
  0.08460744 = sum of:
    0.048397 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 4058) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.048397 = score(doc=4058,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.19890657 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051092815 = queryNorm
        0.24331525 = fieldWeight in 4058, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4058)
    0.036210433 = product of:
      0.072420865 = sum of:
        0.072420865 = weight(_text_:classification in 4058) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.072420865 = score(doc=4058,freq=20.0), product of:
            0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = queryNorm
            0.4450763 = fieldWeight in 4058, product of:
              4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
                20.0 = termFreq=20.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4058)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Content

Enthält die Beiträge: Blake, V.L.P.: Forging the Anglo-American Cataloging Alliance: descriptive cataloging, 1830-1908; M. Carpenter, M.: The original 73 rules of the British Museum: a preliminary analysis; De Rijk Spanhoff, E.: Principle issues: catalog paradigms, old and new; Mutula, S.M., Tsvakai, M.: Historical perspectives of cataloguing and classification; Barber, E.E., Tripaldi, N.M., Pisano, S.L.: Facts, approaches, and reflections an classification in the history of Argentine librarianship; MirandaArguedas, A.: Standardization of technical processes in Central American Libraries; Steinhagen, EN.: Historical perspective of a union catalog in Chile: authorities and periodicals; Liu, S.Q., Shen, Z.G.: The development of cataloging in China; Popst, H.: The development of descriptive cataloging in Germany; Croissant, C.R.: RAK or AACR2? : the current discussion in Germany an cataloging rules; Soltani, P.: Historical aspects of cataloging and classification in Iran; Takawashi, T.: Cataloging in Japan: relationship between Japanese and Western cataloging rules; Martinez-Arellano, F.F.: Cataloging and classification history in Mexico; Carter, R.C.: Three book collectors of imperial Spain; Lincoln, T.: Cultural reassertion of Alaska native languages and cultures: libraries' responses; Descriptive standards and the archival profession; Shuler, J.A.: Foundations of government information and bibliographic control in the United States: 1789-1900; Zhou, L.: Characteristics of material organization and classification in the Kinsey Institute Library; Goldberg, J.E.: Development of a universal law classification: a retrospective an Library of Congress Class K; Lubas, R.L.: The evolution of bibliographic control of maps; Guthrie II, L.S.: Monastic cataloging and classification and the beginnings of Class B at the Library of Congress; Bradley, C.J.: Classifying and cataloguing music in American Libraries: a historical overview; Haddad, P.: Cataloging and classification of Pacific and Asian language materials at the National Library of Australia; Russell, B.M.: Description and access in rare books cataloging: a historical survey; Waithe, M.E., Vintro, M.E.: Posthumously plagiarizing Oliva Sabuco: an appeal to cataloging librarians; Walravens, H.: Serials cataloguing in Germany: the historical development; Smiraglia, R.P.: The history of The Work in the modern catalog.

Footnote

Also published as Cataloging and Classification Quarterly, 35(2002/03)1/2 and 35(2002/03)3/4

0.053284697 = product of:
  0.07992704 = sum of:
    0.059888236 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 575) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.059888236 = score(doc=575,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19890657 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051092815 = queryNorm
        0.30108726 = fieldWeight in 575, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=575)
    0.020038802 = product of:
      0.040077604 = sum of:
        0.040077604 = weight(_text_:classification in 575) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040077604 = score(doc=575,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = queryNorm
            0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 575, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=575)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Librarians in the United States always seem to be trying to reduce their costs and share resources through various centralized or cooperative endeavors. Early cooperative cataloging efforts, prior to 1967 when the MARC format made its appearance and automation took off, clearly recognized the need to create a shared national resource of bibliographic records. Yet, the dreams of cataloging it once for all turned into nightmares over and over as many schemes were tried and failed. However, some schemes succeeded and millions of items were cataloged through these early efforts. The promise of our preliminary steps in cooperative cataloging during the pre-automation era sparked our imaginations and raised our hopes for the future.

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 17(1993) nos.3/4, S.3-38

0.053284697 = product of:
  0.07992704 = sum of:
    0.059888236 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.059888236 = score(doc=2973,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19890657 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051092815 = queryNorm
        0.30108726 = fieldWeight in 2973, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2973)
    0.020038802 = product of:
      0.040077604 = sum of:
        0.040077604 = weight(_text_:classification in 2973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040077604 = score(doc=2973,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = queryNorm
            0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 2973, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2973)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 47(2009) no.2, S.xx-xx

0.050415646 = product of:
  0.07562347 = sum of:
    0.05133277 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 5490) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05133277 = score(doc=5490,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19890657 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051092815 = queryNorm
        0.2580748 = fieldWeight in 5490, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5490)
    0.024290698 = product of:
      0.048581395 = sum of:
        0.048581395 = weight(_text_:classification in 5490) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.048581395 = score(doc=5490,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = queryNorm
            0.29856625 = fieldWeight in 5490, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5490)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

In 1943 the Japanese League of Young Librarians published Nippon Catalog Rules (NCR1942) based on ALA 1908, and adopted the author main-entry system for Japanese and Western materials. After World War II, the Japan Library Association (JLA) compiled and published NCR1952, based on ALA 1949 and LC 1949 but maintained the author main-entry system. The main-entry system was then replaced by an alternative heading method, which came to be known as the Description-Independent-System (DIS). NCR1965 adopted the main entry principle, which was based on the Paris Principles of 1961. NCR1977 was compiled and published by the JLA Cataloging Committee and based upon a "no-main-entry principle." Then in 1987, the Committee published the standard edition of the rules, which was completely compatible with the International Standard Bibliographic Description (ISBD). NCR1987R was published in 1994 and NCR1987R01 in 2001, which included revised "Chapter 9: Computer Files," devised according to ISBD(ER).

Footnote

Beitrag eines Themenheftes: Historical aspects of cataloging and classification; Part I

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 35(2002) nos.1/2, S.209-226

0.050064236 = product of:
  0.15019271 = sum of:
    0.15019271 = sum of:
      0.08096899 = weight(_text_:classification in 4056) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08096899 = score(doc=4056,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051092815 = queryNorm
          0.49761042 = fieldWeight in 4056, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4056)
      0.06922371 = weight(_text_:22 in 4056) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06922371 = score(doc=4056,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17891833 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051092815 = queryNorm
          0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 4056, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4056)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Footnote

Also published as Cataloging and Classification Quarterly, 35(2002/03)1/2 and 35(2002/03)3/4

Pages

S.3-22

Source

Historical aspects of cataloging and classification. Ed.: M.D. Joachim

0.050064236 = product of:
  0.15019271 = sum of:
    0.15019271 = sum of:
      0.08096899 = weight(_text_:classification in 4064) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08096899 = score(doc=4064,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051092815 = queryNorm
          0.49761042 = fieldWeight in 4064, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4064)
      0.06922371 = weight(_text_:22 in 4064) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06922371 = score(doc=4064,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17891833 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051092815 = queryNorm
          0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 4064, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4064)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

29. 7.2006 20:06:22

Footnote

Also published as Cataloging and Classification Quarterly, 35(2002/03)1/2 and 35(2002/03)3/4

Source

Historical aspects of cataloging and classification. Ed.: M.D. Joachim

0.045672596 = product of:
  0.06850889 = sum of:
    0.05133277 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 4627) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05133277 = score(doc=4627,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19890657 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051092815 = queryNorm
        0.2580748 = fieldWeight in 4627, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4627)
    0.017176118 = product of:
      0.034352235 = sum of:
        0.034352235 = weight(_text_:classification in 4627) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034352235 = score(doc=4627,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051092815 = queryNorm
            0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 4627, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4627)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)

Abstract

Scholars working in the field of mediaeval history and cultural history have recognized that understanding the cataloguing and accessioning of books is central to understanding the transmission of ideas. Unfortunately, general histories of libraries and even the library literature seem content to sketch out a chronological development of cataloguing in line with the 19th and 20th century view of library development, from a simple list to complex intellectual systems. In truth, however, those individuals responsible for cataloguing books in mediaeval libraries faced many of the same challenges as cataloguers today: how to organize information; how to serve local needs; and how to provide access to individual works within larger bibliographic formats. Summarizes recent scholarship in the history of the book that relates to library cataloguing, as well as providing parallels to the cooperative library environment of today

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 26(1998) no.3, S.21-30

0.035044964 = product of:
  0.10513489 = sum of:
    0.10513489 = sum of:
      0.05667829 = weight(_text_:classification in 5479) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05667829 = score(doc=5479,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051092815 = queryNorm
          0.34832728 = fieldWeight in 5479, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5479)
      0.048456598 = weight(_text_:22 in 5479) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.048456598 = score(doc=5479,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17891833 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051092815 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5479, 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=5479)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Footnote

Beitrag eines Themenheftes: Historical aspects of cataloging and classification; Part I

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 35(2002) nos.1/2, S.3-22

0.03082156 = product of:
  0.09246468 = sum of:
    0.09246468 = sum of:
      0.06477519 = weight(_text_:classification in 3624) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06477519 = score(doc=3624,freq=16.0), product of:
          0.16271563 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051092815 = queryNorm
          0.39808834 = fieldWeight in 3624, product of:
            4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
              16.0 = termFreq=16.0
            3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3624)
      0.027689485 = weight(_text_:22 in 3624) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.027689485 = score(doc=3624,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17891833 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051092815 = queryNorm
          0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 3624, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3624)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Julia Pettee's contribution to classification theory came about as part of her work an subject headings. Pettee (1872-1967) was for many years librarian of the Union Theological Seminary in New York and was best known for the classification system she developed for the seminary and as the author of the book Subiect Headings. She was one of the first to call attention to the fact that there was a classification system in subject headings. It was, as she put it, "completely concealed when scattered through the alphabetical sequence" (p. 98). On the other hand, she recognized that an index entry was a pointing device and existed to show users specific terms. Index terms, unlike subject headings, could be manipulated, inverted, repeated, and stated in as many words as might be desired. The subject heading, she reiterated, had in it "some idea of classification," but was designed to pull together like material and, unlike the index term, would have limited capability for supplying access by way of synonyms, catchwords, or other associative forms. It is interesting that she also thought of the subject heading in context as forming a three-dimensional system. Logically this is the case whenever one attempts to reach beyond the conventional hierarchy as described an a plane surface, and, in fact, thought out as if the classification were an a plane surface. Pettee described this dimension variously as names "reaching up and over the surface ... hands clasp[ing] in the air" from an individual term (pp. 99-100). Or, in other context, as the mapping of "the many third-dimensional criss-crossing relationships of subject headings." (p. 103) Investigations following Pettee's insight have shown the nature and the degree of the classification latent in subject headings and also in the cross-references of all indexing systems using cross-references of the associative type ("see also" or equivalent terminology). More importantly, study of this type of connection has revealed jumps in logic and meaning caused by homographs or homonyms and resulting in false connections in classification. Standardized rules for making thesauri have prevented some of the more glaring non sequiturs, but much more still needs to be done. The whole area of "related terms", for example, needs to be brought under control, especially in terms of classification mapping.

Footnote

Original in: Pettee, J.: The history and theory of the alphabetical subject approach to books. New York: Wilson 1946. S.22-25.

0.028231587 = product of:
  0.08469476 = sum of:
    0.08469476 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 894) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08469476 = score(doc=894,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.19890657 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051092815 = queryNorm
        0.4258017 = fieldWeight in 894, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=894)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Catalogues date back to the libraries of Babylon and Alexandria, and in the Middle Ages groups of colleges and monasteries created joint catalogues. The dream of universal bibliographic control based on a centralised joint catalogue advanced when the US Library of Congress began selling bibliographic records in 1901. This led to MARC in 1969, and increasing emphasis on standardisation resulted in the first ISBN in 1974

0.025666386 = product of:
  0.07699916 = sum of:
    0.07699916 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 1675) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07699916 = score(doc=1675,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.19890657 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.051092815 = queryNorm
        0.3871122 = fieldWeight in 1675, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1675)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

An overview of the FRBR model, and how it can improve access to information through the helpful organization of metadata records. What is FRBR, and why is everyone talking about it? Is it really going to revolutionize cataloguing? And if so, what form will it take? This book is written for librarians, bibliographic systems designers, library and information science faculty and students, and anyone else who is interested in learning about the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) and how following the FRBR model can improve access to information through helpful organization of the metadata records that are surrogates for information resources. Serials, art, music, moving images, maps, and archival materials are just a few of the formats covered. Not for catalogers only!

Content

1. An Introduction to Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) - Arlene G. Taylor (1-20) 2. An Introduction to Functional Requirements for Authority Data (FRAD) - Glenn E. Patton (21-28) 3. Understanding the Relationship between FRBR and FRAD - Glenn E. Patton (29-34) 4. FRBR and the History of Cataloging - William Denton (35-58) 5. The Impact of Research on the Development of FRBR - Edward T. O'Neill (59-72) 6. Bibliographic Families and Superworks - Richard P. Smiraglia (73-86) 7. FRBR and RDA (Resource Description and Access) - Barbara B. Tillett (87-96) 8. FRBR and Archival Materials - Alexander C. Thurman (97-102) 9. FRBR and Works of Art, Architecture, and Material Culture - Murtha Baca and Sherman Clarke (103-110) 10. FRBR and Cartographic Materials - Mary Lynette Larsgaard (111-116) 11. FRBR and Moving Image Materials - Martha M. Yee (117-130) 12. FRBR and Music - Sherry L. Vellucci (131-152) 13. FRBR and Serials - Steven C. Shadle (153-174)

Footnote

Resonanz: "Arlene Taylor and her compadres don't even try to teach you how to construct a hierarchical record. Instead, they direct their efforts toward showcasing what's possible when digital technology and traditional cataloging practice meet. This is the future of cataloging." - Library Media Connection "The emergence of this textbook is testimony to the breadth and depth of work done to date. It documents much of that work, and provides a good basic introduction to FRBR that is broadly understandable... The relational concepts within FRBR are complicated and can be challenging. This book does a good job of illuminating them in a straightforward manner. It also describes how the application of the FRBR concepts could improve our systems of bibliographic access in very specific ways... For those of us that really want or need to be able to predict the impact that FRBR will have on our work, this is an accessible explanation of the current state of the art. As such it is a real contribution to our understanding." - TechKNOW "Understanding FRBR... features chapters contributed by leading authorities in the cataloging field... It offers a basic introduction to FRBR, discussions about FRBR, FRAD (functional requirements for authority data), and RDA (resource description and access), and the issues involved in using FRBR in nontraditional library settings such as with cartographic materials and music. Both books are well illustrated and include numerous bibliographical resources.' [Reviewed in conjuntion with FRBR: A Guide for the Perplexed]." - Library Journal "Taylor and her contributors cover FRBR and introduce the reader to FRAD as well... All chapters conclude with current and useful references to further reading and more information." - Booklist "Understanding FRBR is clearly written, well illustrated (many of the concepts are clarified by very helpful diagrams), and well indexed; additionally, chapters feature extensive bibliographies, many of which provide URLs to the IFLA groups' documents. While it may seem that this book is of interest only to catalogers, the application of FRBR will change the structure of catalog and the systems used to store and display it; therefore, it is an important text for systems librarians, reference librarians, and anybody else interested in the future of the organization and display of bibliographic information." - College & Research Libraries "Understanding FRBR is a useful and timely book that brings together recent developments in FRBR and offers several assessments of it." - Technicalities "No cataloguer, bibliographic systems designer or library and information science lecturers and students should be without this book. It is a useful resource in acquiring an understanding of what FRBR is about and how it will change the way in which cataloguers will think about cataloguing in future." - The Electronic Library

RSWK

Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records / Aufsatzsammlung

Subject

Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records / Aufsatzsammlung