Search (97 results, page 1 of 5)

  • × theme_ss:"Katalogfragen allgemein"
  • × type_ss:"a"
  1. Sauperl, A.; Saye, J.D.: Have we made any progress? : catalogues of the future revisited (2009) 0.09
    0.08612041 = product of:
      0.114827216 = sum of:
        0.029088326 = weight(_text_:web in 2843) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029088326 = score(doc=2843,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 2843, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2843)
        0.046659768 = weight(_text_:search in 2843) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.046659768 = score(doc=2843,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.27153727 = fieldWeight in 2843, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2843)
        0.03907912 = product of:
          0.07815824 = sum of:
            0.07815824 = weight(_text_:engine in 2843) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07815824 = score(doc=2843,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.26447627 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049439456 = queryNorm
                0.29552078 = fieldWeight in 2843, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2843)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.75 = coord(3/4)
    
    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.
  2. Bertelmann, R.; Höhnow, T.; Volz, S.: Bibliothekssuchmaschine statt Bibliothekskatalog (2007) 0.06
    0.060696527 = product of:
      0.080928706 = sum of:
        0.023270661 = weight(_text_:web in 761) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023270661 = score(doc=761,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.14422815 = fieldWeight in 761, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=761)
        0.026394749 = weight(_text_:search in 761) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026394749 = score(doc=761,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.15360467 = fieldWeight in 761, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=761)
        0.031263296 = product of:
          0.06252659 = sum of:
            0.06252659 = weight(_text_:engine in 761) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06252659 = score(doc=761,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.26447627 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049439456 = queryNorm
                0.23641664 = fieldWeight in 761, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=761)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.75 = coord(3/4)
    
    Abstract
    Der KOBV setzt bereits seit 2005 Suchmaschinentechnologie in verschiedenen Entwicklungsprojekten erfolgreich ein. Zusammen mit der Bibliothek des Wissenschaftsparks Albert Einstein wurde nun der Prototyp einer "Bibliothekssuchmaschine" auf Basis erprobter Open-Source-Technologien aus dem Java-Umfeld (wie Tomcat, Jakarta-Commons, Log4J usw.) als web-basierte Anwendung realisiert, deren Suchmaschinenkern auf der ebenfalls als freie Open-Source Java-Variante erhältlichen Search-Engine-Library Lucene4 basiert. Die erste Version der Bibliothekssuchmaschine läuft seit Ende Oktober im Echtbetrieb. Ziel des Pilotprojektes war die Konzeptionierung, Spezifikation und Implementierung einer neuen, benutzerfreundlichen Suchoberfläche zum schnellen Auffinden fachwissenschaftlich relevanter Daten und Informationen, sowohl in bibliothekseigenen Beständen als auch in zusätzlichen Quellen. Vor dem spezifischen Hintergrund der Spezialbibliothek werden dabei nicht nur Kataloginhalte google-like findbar gemacht, sondern der Suchraum "Katalog" um weitere für die Informationsvermittlung auf dem Campus relevante und spezifische fachwissenschaftliche Inhalte als zusätzliche Suchräume erschlossen. Die neue Anwendung dient dem schnellen Ersteinstieg und leitet die Nutzer dann an die jeweiligen Quellen weiter.
  3. Walsh, L.: ¬The faceted catalog as a tool for searching monographic series : usability study of Lens (2012) 0.06
    0.06001722 = product of:
      0.12003444 = sum of:
        0.06532367 = weight(_text_:search in 1902) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06532367 = score(doc=1902,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.38015217 = fieldWeight in 1902, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1902)
        0.05471077 = product of:
          0.10942154 = sum of:
            0.10942154 = weight(_text_:engine in 1902) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.10942154 = score(doc=1902,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.26447627 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049439456 = queryNorm
                0.41372913 = fieldWeight in 1902, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1902)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    This study explored the functionality of the University of Chicago's faceted catalog, Lens, in respect to monographic series. A user study was designed to evaluate the efficiency of Lens in searching for monographic series and also to determine whether controlled series access in the catalog record improves the search results. The results of the study indicate that while Lens could be considered an adequate tool for searching series that are known to be published under the same title, some changes would make it a better search engine for a series that changes series statements from one volume to another.
  4. Schneider, R.: OPACs, Benutzer und das Web (2009) 0.06
    0.05993805 = product of:
      0.1198761 = sum of:
        0.093082644 = weight(_text_:web in 2905) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.093082644 = score(doc=2905,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.5769126 = fieldWeight in 2905, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2905)
        0.026793454 = product of:
          0.053586908 = sum of:
            0.053586908 = weight(_text_:22 in 2905) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.053586908 = score(doc=2905,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17312855 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049439456 = 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(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    Der Artikel betrachtet anhand einer Studie zum Benutzerverhalten bei der Online-Katalogrecherche den gegenwärtigen Stellenwert und das zukünftige Potential der Web-OPACs. Dabei werden zunächst die Ergebnisse einer quantitativen Logfile-Analyse sowie qualitativer Benutzertests erörtert, bevor aktuelle Entwicklungen der Webtechnologie, die unter den Schlagworten Web 2.0 und Web 3.0 propagiert werden, im Zusammenhang mit der Online-Recherche und der Entwicklung neuartiger Suchverfahren kurz diskutiert werden.
    Date
    22. 2.2009 18:50:43
  5. Kemp, R.: Catalog/cataloging changes and Web 2.0 functionality : new directions for serials (2008) 0.06
    0.05836313 = product of:
      0.11672626 = sum of:
        0.07053544 = weight(_text_:web in 2254) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07053544 = score(doc=2254,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.43716836 = fieldWeight in 2254, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2254)
        0.046190813 = weight(_text_:search in 2254) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.046190813 = score(doc=2254,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.2688082 = fieldWeight in 2254, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2254)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    This article presents an overview of some of the important recent developments in cataloging theory and practice and online catalog design. Changes in cataloging theory and practice include the incorporation of the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records principles into catalogs, the new Resource Description and Access cataloging manual, and the new CONSER Standard Record. Web 2.0 functionalities and advances in search technology and results displays are influencing online catalog design. The paper ends with hypothetical scenarios in which a catalog, enhanced by the developments described, fulfills the tasks of finding serials articles and titles.
    Object
    Web 2.0
  6. Wakeling, S.; Clough, P.; Connaway, L.S.; Sen, B.; Tomás, D.: Users and uses of a global union catalog : a mixed-methods study of WorldCat.org (2017) 0.06
    0.056206264 = product of:
      0.11241253 = sum of:
        0.057146307 = weight(_text_:search in 3794) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.057146307 = score(doc=3794,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.33256388 = fieldWeight in 3794, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3794)
        0.05526622 = product of:
          0.11053244 = sum of:
            0.11053244 = weight(_text_:engine in 3794) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.11053244 = score(doc=3794,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.26447627 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049439456 = queryNorm
                0.41792953 = fieldWeight in 3794, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3794)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    This paper presents the first large-scale investigation of the users and uses of WorldCat.org, the world's largest bibliographic database and global union catalog. Using a mixed-methods approach involving focus group interviews with 120 participants, an online survey with 2,918 responses, and an analysis of transaction logs of approximately 15 million sessions from WorldCat.org, the study provides a new understanding of the context for global union catalog use. We find that WorldCat.org is accessed by a diverse population, with the three primary user groups being librarians, students, and academics. Use of the system is found to fall within three broad types of work-task (professional, academic, and leisure), and we also present an emergent taxonomy of search tasks that encompass known-item, unknown-item, and institutional information searches. Our results support the notion that union catalogs are primarily used for known-item searches, although the volume of traffic to WorldCat.org means that unknown-item searches nonetheless represent an estimated 250,000 sessions per month. Search engine referrals account for almost half of all traffic, but although WorldCat.org effectively connects users referred from institutional library catalogs to other libraries holding a sought item, users arriving from a search engine are less likely to connect to a library.
  7. McCathieNevile, C.; Méndez Rodríguez, E.M.: Library cards for the 21st century (2006) 0.05
    0.05470205 = product of:
      0.1094041 = sum of:
        0.06981198 = weight(_text_:web in 240) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06981198 = score(doc=240,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.43268442 = fieldWeight in 240, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=240)
        0.03959212 = weight(_text_:search in 240) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03959212 = score(doc=240,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.230407 = fieldWeight in 240, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=240)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    This paper presents several reflections on the traditional card catalogues and RDF (Resource Description Framework), which is "the" standard for creating the Semantic Web. This work grew out of discussion between the authors after Working Group on Metadata Schemes meeting held at IFLA conference in Buenos Aires (2004). The paper provides an overview of RDF from the perspective of cataloguers, catalogues and library cards. The central theme is the discussion of resource description as a discipline that could be based on RDF. RDF is explained as a very simple grammar, using metadata and ontologies to semantic search and access. RDF Knitting the Semantic Web Cataloging & Classification Quarterly Volume 43, Numbers 3/4 has the ability to enhance 21st century libraries and metadata interoperability in digital libraries, while maintaining the expressive power that was available to librarians when catalogues were physical artefacts.
    Footnote
    Simultaneously published as Knitting the Semantic Web
    Theme
    Semantic Web
  8. Pera, M.S.; Lund, W.; Ng, Y.-K.: ¬A sophisticated library search strategy using folksonomies and similarity matching (2009) 0.05
    0.0475376 = product of:
      0.0950752 = sum of:
        0.029088326 = weight(_text_:web in 2939) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029088326 = score(doc=2939,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 2939, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2939)
        0.06598687 = weight(_text_:search in 2939) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06598687 = score(doc=2939,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.3840117 = fieldWeight in 2939, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2939)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    Libraries, private and public, offer valuable resources to library patrons. As of today, the only way to locate information archived exclusively in libraries is through their catalogs. Library patrons, however, often find it difficult to formulate a proper query, which requires using specific keywords assigned to different fields of desired library catalog records, to obtain relevant results. These improperly formulated queries often yield irrelevant results or no results at all. This negative experience in dealing with existing library systems turns library patrons away from directly querying library catalogs; instead, they rely on Web search engines to perform their searches first, and upon obtaining the initial information (e.g., titles, subject headings, or authors) on the desired library materials, they query library catalogs. This searching strategy is an evidence of failure of today's library systems. In solving this problem, we propose an enhanced library system, which allows partial, similarity matching of (a) tags defined by ordinary users at a folksonomy site that describe the content of books and (b) unrestricted keywords specified by an ordinary library patron in a query to search for relevant library catalog records. The proposed library system allows patrons posting a query Q using commonly used words and ranks the retrieved results according to their degrees of resemblance with Q while maintaining the query processing time comparable with that achieved by current library search engines.
  9. Frâncu, V.: ¬An interpretation of the FRBR model (2004) 0.05
    0.047296606 = product of:
      0.06306214 = sum of:
        0.023270661 = weight(_text_:web in 2647) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023270661 = score(doc=2647,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.14422815 = fieldWeight in 2647, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2647)
        0.026394749 = weight(_text_:search in 2647) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026394749 = score(doc=2647,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.15360467 = fieldWeight in 2647, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2647)
        0.013396727 = product of:
          0.026793454 = sum of:
            0.026793454 = weight(_text_:22 in 2647) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.026793454 = score(doc=2647,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17312855 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049439456 = queryNorm
                0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2647, 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=2647)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.75 = coord(3/4)
    
    Abstract
    Despite the existence of a logical structural model for bibliographic records which integrates any record type, library catalogues persist in offering catalogue records at the level of 'items'. Such records however, do not clearly indicate which works they contain. Hence the search possibilities of the end user are unduly limited. The Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) present through a conceptual model, independent of any cataloguing code or implementation, a globalized view of the bibliographic universe. This model, a synthesis of the existing cataloguing rules, consists of clearly structured entities and well defined types of relationships among them. From a theoretical viewpoint, the model is likely to be a good knowledge organiser with great potential in identifying the author and the work represented by an item or publication and is able to link different works of the author with different editions, translations or adaptations of those works aiming at better answering the user needs. This paper is presenting an interpretation of the FRBR model opposing it to a traditional bibliographic record of a complex library material.
    Content
    1. Introduction With the diversification of the material available in library collections such as: music, film, 3D objects, cartographic material and electronic resources like CD-ROMS and Web sites, the existing cataloguing principles and codes are no longer adequate to enable the user to find, identify, select and obtain a particular entity. The problem is not only that material fails to be appropriately represented in the catalogue records but also access to such material, or parts of it, is difficult if possible at all. Consequently, the need emerged to develop new rules and build up a new conceptual model able to cope with all the requirements demanded by the existing library material. The Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records developed by an IFLA Study Group from 1992 through 1997 present a generalised view of the bibliographic universe and are intended to be independent of any cataloguing code or implementation (Tillett, 2002). Outstanding scholars like Antonio Panizzi, Charles A. Cutter and Seymour Lubetzky formulated the basic cataloguing principles of which some can be retrieved, as Denton (2003) argues as updated versions, between the basic lines of the FRBR model: - the relation work-author groups all the works of an author - all the editions, translations, adaptations of a work are clearly separated (as expressions and manifestations) - all the expressions and manifestations of a work are collocated with their related works in bibliographic families - any document (manifestation and item) can be found if the author, title or subject of that document is known - the author is authorised by the authority control - the title is an intrinsic part of the work + authority control entity
    Date
    17. 6.2015 14:40:22
  10. Lügger, J.: Neustart für Bibliotheken ins Informationszeitalter (2006) 0.04
    0.043898437 = product of:
      0.087796874 = sum of:
        0.041137107 = weight(_text_:web in 889) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.041137107 = score(doc=889,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.25496176 = fieldWeight in 889, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=889)
        0.046659768 = weight(_text_:search in 889) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.046659768 = score(doc=889,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.27153727 = fieldWeight in 889, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=889)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    Wir erleben zu Beginn des aufkommenden Informationszeitalters mit dem Siegeszug von Google und anderen Internet-Technologien einen Wandel im Verhalten von Wissenschaftlern und Studenten, der mit dem Einsatz von Google Scholar und Google Book Search einem Paradigmenwechsel für Bibliotheken und Informationsversorger gleichkommt. Der Artikel untersucht die technischen Hintergründe für den Erfolg dieser besonderen Art des Information Retrievals: Fulltext Indexing und Citation Ranking als besondere Form des Information Mining. Er diskutiert Stärken und auch Schwächen des Google-Ansatzes. Der Autor stellt sich auch der Frage, unter welchen Bedingungen es möglich ist, ein zu Google Scholar und der Google Book Search konkurrenzfähiges Retrieval in der Landschaft der Bibliotheken und Bibliotheksverbünde zu errichten. Die These ist, dass dieses unter Einsatz des Open Source Indexierers Lucene und des Web-Robots Nutch möglich ist. Bibliotheken können durch gezielten Einsatz solcher Internet-Technologien dem Nutzer die Leistungen, welche Google uns mit seinen Tools im Visible Web und mit Referenzen auf Citations in der Welt der Literatur zur Verfügung stellt, in vergleichbarer Art auch für ihre eigenen durch Lizenzen geschützten digitalen Journale und ihre speziellen lokal verfügbaren Ressourcen, auf die Internet-Suchmaschinen keine Zugriff haben, anbieten. Es besteht die Hoffnung, dass Nutzer dann nicht - wie in einer kürzlich erschienenen Studie des OCLC konstatiert - überwiegend im Internet verbleiben, sondern bei ihrer Suche auch den Weg zu den Angeboten der örtlichen Bibliothek attraktiv finden.
  11. Skinner, D.G.: ¬A comparison of searching functionality of a VuFind catalogue implementation and the traditional catalogue (2012) 0.04
    0.043457236 = product of:
      0.08691447 = sum of:
        0.04072366 = weight(_text_:web in 5568) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04072366 = score(doc=5568,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.25239927 = fieldWeight in 5568, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5568)
        0.046190813 = weight(_text_:search in 5568) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.046190813 = score(doc=5568,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.2688082 = fieldWeight in 5568, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5568)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    As of spring semester 2010, Georgia Southern University began using a VuFind implementation as the default access to the library catalogue on the library Web page while maintaining a secondary link to the traditional Voyager "classic" catalogue. VuFind is an open-source product that has been adopted and adapted by all the state universities and colleges in the state of Georgia. For approximately ten years, Georgia libraries have used Voyager as their catalogue, and it remains available to users as the "classic" search option. This report examines the local VuFind implementation compared to the more traditional Voyager implementation, emphasizing the differences in the searching capabilities of each.
  12. Crosnier, H. Le: Nouveaux besoins, nouveaux services, nouveaux catalogues (1997) 0.04
    0.037249055 = product of:
      0.07449811 = sum of:
        0.03490599 = weight(_text_:web in 918) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03490599 = score(doc=918,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 918, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=918)
        0.03959212 = weight(_text_:search in 918) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03959212 = score(doc=918,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.230407 = fieldWeight in 918, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=918)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    For users, the catalogue is a tool to assist in satisfying information demands. Bibliographic databases raise the question of how to describe a document to facilitate retrieval. Information technology development have led to the creation of hypercatalogues, affording links to related material and other services. This necessitates improved descriptive cataloguing and also improved search interfaces to simplify user manipulation, along the lines of the Web. Given the massive output of electronic documents, the librarian's role is to select, prioritise and organise. The information society and its consequent economic consequences for the social organisation of knowledge raise the prospect of marginalisation of libraries. Catalogues enable access to knowledge as a public good, but this access must be democratic
  13. Barton, J.; Mak, L.: Old hopes, new possibilities : next-generation catalogues and the centralization of access (2012) 0.04
    0.037249055 = product of:
      0.07449811 = sum of:
        0.03490599 = weight(_text_:web in 5560) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03490599 = score(doc=5560,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 5560, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5560)
        0.03959212 = weight(_text_:search in 5560) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03959212 = score(doc=5560,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.230407 = fieldWeight in 5560, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5560)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    Next-generation catalogues can be viewed as the latest manifestation of a tendency in library catalogue history to strive for centralization of access to collections-a single portal for the discovery of library resources. Due to an increasing volume of published materials and the explosion of online information resources during the Internet age, the library does not currently provide centralized access to its various information silos, nor does it provide a user-friendly search and retrieval experience for users whose expectations are shaped by Google and other major commercial Web sites. Searching across library resources is a complicated task, bearing high-attention "transaction costs" for the user, which discourage the use of library resources. Libraries need access systems that minimize complexity, easing discovery and delivery of resources for user populations. Here, the authors review past efforts of centralization of access, consider the potential of next-generation catalogues in the context of this historical tendency toward centralization of access, and describe what goals underlie that centralization.
  14. Han, M.-J.: New discovery services and library bibliographic control (2012) 0.04
    0.037249055 = product of:
      0.07449811 = sum of:
        0.03490599 = weight(_text_:web in 5569) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03490599 = score(doc=5569,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 5569, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5569)
        0.03959212 = weight(_text_:search in 5569) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03959212 = score(doc=5569,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.230407 = fieldWeight in 5569, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5569)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    To improve resource discovery and retrieval, libraries have implemented new discovery services, such as next generation catalogues, federated search, and Web-scale discovery, in addition to their traditional integrated library systems. These new discovery services greatly improve the user experience by utilizing existing cataloguing records housed within the library system or in combination with metadata from other sources, both in and outside of libraries. However, to maximize the functionality of these discovery services, libraries must reexamine current cataloguing practices and the way libraries control the bibliographic description to better serve the user's needs. This report discusses how new discovery services use the cataloguing records and the challenges that libraries encounter in bibliographic control to work with new discovery services, including the quality of cataloguing records, granular levels of bibliographic description, and integration of user-generated metadata into the cataloguing records. Each of these aspects requires further discussion.
  15. Hillmann, D.I.: "Parallel universes" or meaningful relationships : envisioning a future for the OPAC and the net (1996) 0.04
    0.036667388 = product of:
      0.073334776 = sum of:
        0.046541322 = weight(_text_:web in 5581) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.046541322 = score(doc=5581,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.2884563 = fieldWeight in 5581, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5581)
        0.026793454 = product of:
          0.053586908 = sum of:
            0.053586908 = weight(_text_:22 in 5581) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.053586908 = score(doc=5581,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17312855 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049439456 = 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(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    Over the past year, innumerable discussions on the relationship between traditional library OPACs and the newly burgeoning World WideWeb have occured in many libraries and in virtually every library related discussion list. Rumors and speculation abound, some insisting that SGML will replace USMARC "soon," others maintaining that OPACs that haven't migrated to the Web will go the way of the dinosaurs.
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 22(1996) nos.3/4, S.97-103
  16. Pfeiffer, T.; Summann, F.; Hellriegel, J.; Wolf, S.; Pietsch, C.: Virtuelle Realität zur Bereitstellung integrierter Suchumgebungen (2017) 0.04
    0.036036275 = product of:
      0.07207255 = sum of:
        0.032993436 = weight(_text_:search in 4001) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032993436 = score(doc=4001,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.19200584 = fieldWeight in 4001, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4001)
        0.03907912 = product of:
          0.07815824 = sum of:
            0.07815824 = weight(_text_:engine in 4001) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07815824 = score(doc=4001,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.26447627 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049439456 = queryNorm
                0.29552078 = fieldWeight in 4001, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  5.349498 = idf(docFreq=570, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4001)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    Das Exzellenzcluster Kognitive Interaktionstechnologie (CITEC) an der Universität Bielefeld beschäftigt sich seit 2013 mit der virtuellen Realität (VR). Ausgehend von konkreten Projektkooperationen (Publikations- und Forschungsdatenmanagement) mit der Universitätsbibliothek ist die Idee entstanden, mit der in 2016 neu angebotenen Konsumer-VR-Hardware die im Labor entwickelten Interaktionstechniken auf geeignete Szenarien im Bereich von bibliothekarischen Umgebungen anzuwenden. Als interessantes Anwendungsgebiet kristallisierte sich im gemeinsamen Diskurs die Literatursuche heraus: Als Suchsystem wurde die Bielefelder BASE-Datenbank (d.i. Bielefeld Academic Search Engine mit inzwischen mehr als 100 Mio. indexierten Dokumenten) ausgewählt. Diese Auswahl erfolgte vor dem Hintergrund, dass sich die von zahlreichen externen Institutionen bereits genutzte API-Schnittstelle als universell und robust erwiesen hat und umfangreiche Funktionen bereitstellt. Auf der Grundlage der umfangreichen theoretischen und praktischen Erfahrungen des CITEC mit VRTechniken wurde der Prototyp für eine virtuelle Suchumgebung realisiert, der ein Retrieval in einem Suchraum von Online-Dokumenten erlaubt. Die Nutzerinnen und Nutzer können die Suchanfrage explorativ zusammenstellen und dabei die Ergebnisse intuitiv verwalten. Unterstützt werden sie dabei durch Ergebnisanzeige, Sortierung, Optimierung des Suchergebnisses mittels Suchverfeinerung (Drilldown-basiert) oder Anfrageerweiterung und Wiederverwendung von abgelegten Ergebnissen. Gleichzeitig wird der Zugriff- und Lizenzstatus visualisiert und die Detailanzeige der Metadaten des Objektes integriert.
  17. Bowman, J.H.: ¬The catalog as barrier to retrieval : Part 1: hyphens and ampersands in titles (2000) 0.03
    0.034817543 = product of:
      0.069635086 = sum of:
        0.046190813 = weight(_text_:search in 5365) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.046190813 = score(doc=5365,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.2688082 = fieldWeight in 5365, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5365)
        0.023444273 = product of:
          0.046888545 = sum of:
            0.046888545 = weight(_text_:22 in 5365) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.046888545 = score(doc=5365,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17312855 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049439456 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5365, 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=5365)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    An Internet survey of 38 different OPAC systems, at eighty different libraries, was undertaken to investigate the effect on retrieval of the presence of the hyphen or the ampersand in titles. Title and Keyword searches were performed. In Title search, 22 of the systems treat the hyphen as equivalent to a space, while in Keyword the number is 16. The other systems treat it in various different ways (even including the equivalent of NOT), which means that results of searching multiple catalogs are very inconsistent. The ampersand may be ignored, treated as a special character, or treated as "and," again with very inconsistent results. Various recommendations are made with a view to improving consistency of performance.
  18. 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) 0.03
    0.029969025 = product of:
      0.05993805 = sum of:
        0.046541322 = weight(_text_:web in 2672) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.046541322 = score(doc=2672,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.2884563 = fieldWeight in 2672, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2672)
        0.013396727 = product of:
          0.026793454 = sum of:
            0.026793454 = weight(_text_:22 in 2672) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.026793454 = score(doc=2672,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17312855 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049439456 = 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(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    Die verschiedenen unter dem Schlagwort "Bibliothek 2.0" zusammengefassten neuen Dienste und Komponenten wie etwa Wikis, Tagging-Systeme und Blogs sind seit einiger Zeit in aller Munde und dringen über Fortbildungsveranstaltungen, Konferenzen und Publikationsorgane immer mehr in das deutschsprachige Bibliothekswesen ein. Darüber hinaus gibt es öffentlich geförderte Projekte zu bibliothekarischen 2.0-Themen und sogar ein Projekt, welches sich explizit einen 2.0-Katalog zum Ziel gesetzt hat. In diesem Beitrag soll es nun nicht um die Vorstellung eines weiteren Projekts im Dienste des Themas "Bibliothek 2.0" gehen, ebenso hat dieser Beitrag nicht den Anspruch, die Diskussion über die möglichen Vor- oder Nachteile dieser Thematik auf theoretischer Ebene voranzubringen. Vielmehr wird hier ganz praktisch aus Sicht einer kleinen Universitätsbibliothek, der Bibliothek der Helmut-SchmidtUniversität (HSU) - Universität der Bundeswehr Hamburg, aufgezeigt, wie das Thema "Web/Bibliothek 2.0" durchaus neben und in Unterstützung von weiteren nutzerorientierten Servicedienstleistungen auch in kleinen Schritten positive Auswirkungen für die Nutzerinnen und Nutzer haben kann. Der Focus wird dabei auf dem zentralen Arbeits- und Rechercheinstrument der Bibliotheksnutzer liegen, dem Bibliothekskatalog. Speziell wird es darum gehen, wie auf relativ einfache Art und Weise durch Anwendung verschiedener Elemente anderer Dienste und Anbieter sowie das Aufgreifen von Schnittstellen und wenig aufwendigen Verbesserungen, Mehrwert für die Nutzerinnen und Nutzer zu erzielen ist. Ein zentraler Begriff bei fast allen Überlegungen, die im Zusammenhang mit der Verbesserung und Anreicherung des Kataloges stehen, war und ist das Thema "Mash-up". Unter Mashups - ein Begriff, der gerade im Zusammenhang mit dem Thema "Web 2.0" im deutschsprachigen Raum eingeführt und adaptiert wurde - wird das Verfahren bezeichnet, Web-Inhalte neu zu kombinieren. Dabei nutzt man bei und für Mashups offene "APIs" (Application Programming Interfaces, also offene Programmierschnittstellen), die von anderen Web-Anwendungen zur Verfügung gestellt werden.
    Date
    22. 2.2009 19:40:38
  19. Arsenault, C.; Ménard, E.: Searching titles with initial articles in library catalogs : a case study and search behavior analysis (2007) 0.03
    0.029843606 = product of:
      0.059687212 = sum of:
        0.03959212 = weight(_text_:search in 2264) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03959212 = score(doc=2264,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17183559 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.230407 = fieldWeight in 2264, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2264)
        0.02009509 = product of:
          0.04019018 = sum of:
            0.04019018 = weight(_text_:22 in 2264) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04019018 = score(doc=2264,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17312855 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049439456 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2264, 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=2264)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  20. Homan, P.A.: Library catalog notes for "bad books" : ethics vs. responsibilities (2012) 0.02
    0.022917118 = product of:
      0.045834236 = sum of:
        0.029088326 = weight(_text_:web in 420) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029088326 = score(doc=420,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16134618 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049439456 = queryNorm
            0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 420, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=420)
        0.01674591 = product of:
          0.03349182 = sum of:
            0.03349182 = weight(_text_:22 in 420) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03349182 = score(doc=420,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17312855 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.049439456 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 420, 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=420)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    The conflict between librarians' ethics and their responsibilities in the process of progressive collection management, which applies the principles of cost accounting to libraries, to call attention to the "bad books" in their collections that are compromised by age, error, abridgement, expurgation, plagiarism, copyright violation, libel, or fraud, is discussed. According to Charles Cutter, notes in catalog records should call attention to the best books but ignore the bad ones. Libraries that can afford to keep their "bad books," however, which often have a valuable second life, must call attention to their intellectual contexts in notes in the catalog records. Michael Bellesiles's Arming America, the most famous case of academic fraud at the turn of the twenty-first century, is used as a test case. Given the bias of content enhancement that automatically pulls content from the Web into library catalogs, catalog notes for "bad books" may be the only way for librarians to uphold their ethical principles regarding collection management while fulfilling their professional responsibilities to their users in calling attention to their "bad books."
    Date
    27. 9.2012 14:22:00

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 61
  • d 32
  • sp 2
  • f 1
  • i 1
  • More… Less…

Types