Search (7 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × theme_ss:"Katalogfragen allgemein"
  • × theme_ss:"OPAC"
  1. Hillmann, D.I.: "Parallel universes" or meaningful relationships : envisioning a future for the OPAC and the net (1996) 0.01
    0.013343729 = product of:
      0.026687458 = sum of:
        0.026687458 = product of:
          0.053374916 = sum of:
            0.053374916 = weight(_text_:22 in 5581) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.053374916 = score(doc=5581,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17244364 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04924387 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 5581, 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=5581)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 22(1996) nos.3/4, S.97-103
  2. Schneider, R.: OPACs, Benutzer und das Web (2009) 0.01
    0.013343729 = product of:
      0.026687458 = sum of:
        0.026687458 = product of:
          0.053374916 = sum of:
            0.053374916 = weight(_text_:22 in 2905) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.053374916 = score(doc=2905,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17244364 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04924387 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2905, 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=2905)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    22. 2.2009 18:50:43
  3. Hillmann, D.I.: 'Parallel universes' or meaningful relationships : envisioning a future for the OPAC and the net (1996) 0.01
    0.011675763 = product of:
      0.023351526 = sum of:
        0.023351526 = product of:
          0.04670305 = sum of:
            0.04670305 = weight(_text_:22 in 3656) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04670305 = score(doc=3656,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17244364 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04924387 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3656, 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=3656)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Series
    Cataloging and classification quarterly; vol.22, nos.3/4
  4. Morgan, E.L.: Possible solutions for incorporating digital information mediums into traditional library cataloging services (1996) 0.01
    0.011675763 = product of:
      0.023351526 = sum of:
        0.023351526 = product of:
          0.04670305 = sum of:
            0.04670305 = weight(_text_:22 in 600) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04670305 = score(doc=600,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17244364 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04924387 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 600, 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=600)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 22(1996) nos.3/4, S.143-170
  5. Sauperl, A.; Saye, J.D.: Have we made any progress? : catalogues of the future revisited (2009) 0.01
    0.009994383 = product of:
      0.019988766 = sum of:
        0.019988766 = product of:
          0.079955064 = sum of:
            0.079955064 = weight(_text_:authors in 2843) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.079955064 = score(doc=2843,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.22449365 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04924387 = queryNorm
                0.35615736 = fieldWeight in 2843, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2843)
          0.25 = coord(1/4)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Purpose - Library online public access catalogues (OPACs) are considered to be unattractive in comparison with popular internet sites. In 2000, the authors presented some suggestions on how library catalogues should change. Have librarians actually made their OPACs more user-friendly by adopting techniques and technologies already present in other information resources? This paper aims to address these issues. Design/methodology/approach - The characteristics of four OPACs, one online bookstore and two internet search engines are analyzed. The paper reviews some of the changes and directions suggested by researchers and adds some of authors own. All this is in the hope that library catalogues will survive "Google attack." Findings - Changes are identified in the information services studied over a seven-year period. Least development is found in library catalogues. Suggestions are made for library catalogues of the future. Research limitations/implications - A library catalogue, a web search engine and an internet bookstore cannot be compared directly because of differences in scope. But features from each could be fruitfully used in others. Practical implications - OPACs must be both attractive and useful. They should be at least as easy to use as their competitors. With the results of research as well as the knowledge librarians have many years, the profession should be able to develop better OPACs than we have today and regain lost ground in the "competition" for those with information needs. Originality/value - A comparison of OPAC features in 2000 and 2007, even if subjective, can provide a panoramic view of the development of the field.
  6. Petrucciani, A.: Quality of library catalogs and value of (good) catalogs (2015) 0.01
    0.009893934 = product of:
      0.019787868 = sum of:
        0.019787868 = product of:
          0.079151474 = sum of:
            0.079151474 = weight(_text_:authors in 1878) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.079151474 = score(doc=1878,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.22449365 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04924387 = queryNorm
                0.35257778 = fieldWeight in 1878, 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=1878)
          0.25 = coord(1/4)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    The quality of large catalogs is uneven and often low, but this issue is underrated and understudied. Library catalogs often fail to communicate correct and clear information to users and their low quality is not simply due to faults, duplications, and so on but also to unwise cataloging standards and policies. While there is plenty of uncontrolled information about books and other publications, the need for good-quality bibliographic information is apparent and library catalogs may provide a trustworthy map of the publishing output, with full control of editions, works, authors, and so on and effective navigation functions, which are lacking in today's information-rich environment.
  7. Hahn, U.; Schulze, M.: Katalogerweiterungen, Mashups und Elemente der Bibliothek 2.0" in der Praxis : der Katalog der Universitätsbibliothek der Helmut-Schmidt-Universität (IHSU) Universität der Bundeswehr Hamburg (2009) 0.01
    0.0066718645 = product of:
      0.013343729 = sum of:
        0.013343729 = product of:
          0.026687458 = sum of:
            0.026687458 = weight(_text_:22 in 2672) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.026687458 = score(doc=2672,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17244364 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.04924387 = queryNorm
                0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2672, 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=2672)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    22. 2.2009 19:40:38