Search (76 results, page 4 of 4)

  • × theme_ss:"Katalogfragen allgemein"
  • × year_i:[2000 TO 2010}
  1. Bianchini, C.; Guerrini, M.: From bibliographic models to cataloguing rules : remarks on FRBR, ICP, ISBD, and RDA and the relationships between them (2009) 0.00 
    0.0016464829 = product of:
  0.014818345 = sum of:
    0.014818345 = weight(_text_:of in 2973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014818345 = score(doc=2973,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.24188137 = fieldWeight in 2973, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2973)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    Abstract
    This article discusses the changes that are occurring in the world of cataloguing. It argues that these changes need to be coordinated. It also discusses the feature of current OPACs, FRBR, the Paris Principles and its proposed replacement (ICP), AACR2 and its proposed replacement (RDA), ISBD, and the relationships between and among these standards. It argues that the syntax of ISBD is an essential component of RDA and all future international and national cataloguing codes.
  2. Hider, P.; Tan, K.-C.: Constructing record quality measures based on catalog use (2008) 0.00 
    0.001577849 = product of:
  0.014200641 = sum of:
    0.014200641 = weight(_text_:of in 2724) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014200641 = score(doc=2724,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.23179851 = fieldWeight in 2724, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2724)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    Abstract
    Approaches to the measurement of catalog record quality are discussed. The systematic application of specific evaluation criteria may be more reliable than expert opinion, if not necessarily more accurate, and the construction of an error weightings table based on empirical investigation into catalog use is described. Although this process proved to be complex, and involved significant methodological problems, it was shown to be readily achievable. As catalog use may in many cases be insufficiently uniform across libraries to allow for generic evaluation criteria, it is proposed that cataloging managers construct their own set by studying the impact that record quality has on the particular use of their own catalogs. Thus more empirical research into catalog use is advocated, in order to supplement expert opinion and to build toward a practice of evidence-based cataloging.
  3. Behrens-Neumann, R.: Aus der 55. Sitzung der Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Verbundsysteme am 5. und 6. November 2008 in Frankfurt am Main (2009) 0.00 
    0.0014744176 = product of:
  0.013269759 = sum of:
    0.013269759 = product of:
      0.026539518 = sum of:
        0.026539518 = weight(_text_:22 in 2778) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026539518 = score(doc=2778,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13719016 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2778, 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=2778)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    Date
    22. 2.2009 19:35:56
  4. Petek, M.: Konzeptualni modelni na podrocju knjiznicnih katalogov (2000) 0.00 
    0.0014112709 = product of:
  0.012701439 = sum of:
    0.012701439 = weight(_text_:of in 5178) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012701439 = score(doc=5178,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.20732689 = fieldWeight in 5178, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=5178)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    Footnote
    Übers. d. Titels: Conceptual models in the field of library catalogues
  5. Hider, P.: ¬The bibliographic advantages of a centralised union catalogue for ILL and resource sharing (2003) 0.00 
    0.0014112709 = product of:
  0.012701439 = sum of:
    0.012701439 = weight(_text_:of in 1737) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012701439 = score(doc=1737,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.20732689 = fieldWeight in 1737, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1737)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
  6. López Guillamón, I.: Evolución reciente de la catalogación (2004) 0.00 
    0.0014112709 = product of:
  0.012701439 = sum of:
    0.012701439 = weight(_text_:of in 3760) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012701439 = score(doc=3760,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.20732689 = fieldWeight in 3760, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3760)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    Footnote
    Übers. d. Titels: Recent evolution of cataloguing. - Vgl. auch: http://www.um.es/fccd/anales/ad07/ad0709.pdf.
  7. McCathieNevile, C.; Méndez Rodríguez, E.M.: Library cards for the 21st century (2006) 0.00 
    0.0014112709 = product of:
  0.012701439 = sum of:
    0.012701439 = weight(_text_:of in 240) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012701439 = score(doc=240,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.20732689 = fieldWeight in 240, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=240)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    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.
  8. Papy, F.; Chauvin, S.: Au-delà de la transfiguration du catalogue : Le Visual... Catalog : Mort et transfiguration des catalogues (2005) 0.00 
    0.001330559 = product of:
  0.011975031 = sum of:
    0.011975031 = weight(_text_:of in 177) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011975031 = score(doc=177,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.19546966 = fieldWeight in 177, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=177)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    Footnote
    Übers. des Titels: Beyond the transfiguration of the catalogue: the Visual... Catalog : Death and transfiguration of catalogues
  9. Condron, L.: Management by action : how we're embracing new cataloging work at Tufts (2000) 0.00 
    0.0013148742 = product of:
  0.011833867 = sum of:
    0.011833867 = weight(_text_:of in 5390) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011833867 = score(doc=5390,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.19316542 = fieldWeight in 5390, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5390)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    Abstract
    Preparing for new cataloging such as metadata beyond MARC and thesauri beyond LCSH, is an exciting and daunting challenge for university libraries. Advancing technologies, as well as a growing demand for quality information with rapid access is fueling the need for technical services departments to restructure their work to accommodate the evolving world of information management. Catalogers who have been following the same procedures and practices for many years may find this change particularly difficult. Team leaders are often faced with breaking through skepticism and resistance to this new work in order to enable necessary progress. We found that discussions and gradual introduction of new directions is important to acceptance by team members. However, just as important is the implementation of an action plan to ensure that progress is ongoing. Reengineering Acquisitions and Cataloging into Current Processes and Information Management Initiatives, along with forming several focus groups to investigate and evaluate cataloging work, is proving successful for embracing new cataloging at Tufts University.
    Footnote
    Beitrag eines Themenheftes "Managing cataloging and the organization of information: philosophies, practices and challenges at the onset of the 21st century. Part II: Specialized and academic libraries in the United States"
  10. Coyle, K.; Hillmann, D.: Resource Description and Access (RDA) : cataloging rules for the 20th century (2007) 0.00 
    0.0013148742 = product of:
  0.011833867 = sum of:
    0.011833867 = weight(_text_:of in 2525) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011833867 = score(doc=2525,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.19316542 = fieldWeight in 2525, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2525)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    Abstract
    There is evidence that many individuals and organizations in the library world do not support the work taking place to develop a next generation of the library cataloging rules. The authors describe the tensions existing between those advocating an incremental change to cataloging process and others who desire a bolder library entry into the digital era. Libraries have lost their place as primary information providers, surpassed by more agile (and in many cases wealthier) purveyors of digital information delivery services. Although libraries still manage materials that are not available elsewhere, the library's approach to user service and the user interface is not competing successfully against services like Amazon or Google. If libraries are to avoid further marginalization, they need to make a fundamental change in their approach to user services. The library's signature service, its catalog, uses rules for cataloging that are remnants of a long departed technology: the card catalog. Modifications to the rules, such as those proposed by the Resource Description and Access (RDA) development effort, can only keep us rooted firmly in the 20th, if not the 19th century. A more radical change is required that will contribute to the library of the future, re-imagined and integrated with the chosen workflow of its users.
  11. Condron, L.: Management by action : how we're embracing new cataloging work at Tufts (2001) 0.00 
    0.0012221966 = product of:
  0.010999769 = sum of:
    0.010999769 = weight(_text_:of in 5430) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010999769 = score(doc=5430,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.17955035 = fieldWeight in 5430, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5430)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    Abstract
    Preparing for new cataloging such as metadata beyond MARC and thesauri beyond LCSH, is an exciting and daunting challenge for university libraries. Advancing technologies, as well as a growing demand for quality information with rapid access is fueling the need for technical services departments to restructure their work to accommodate the evolving world of information management. Catalogers who have been following the same procedures and practices for many years may find this change particularly difficult. Team leaders are often faced with breaking through skepticism and resistance to this new work in order to enable necessary progress. We found that discussions and gradual introduction of new directions is important to acceptance by team members. However, just as important is the implementation of an action plan to ensure that progress is ongoing. Reengineering Acquisitions and Cataloging into Current Processes and Information Management Initiatives, along with forming several focus groups to investigate and evaluate cataloging work, is proving successful for embracing new cataloging at Tufts University.
  12. Scheerer, H.: Gülich online : Die Retrokonversion des Zettelkatalogs der Bundestagsbibliothek (2007) 0.00 
    0.0011795341 = product of:
  0.010615807 = sum of:
    0.010615807 = product of:
      0.021231614 = sum of:
        0.021231614 = weight(_text_:22 in 513) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021231614 = score(doc=513,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13719016 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 513, 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=513)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    Date
    22. 8.2007 11:43:43
  13. 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) 0.00 
    0.0011795341 = product of:
  0.010615807 = sum of:
    0.010615807 = product of:
      0.021231614 = sum of:
        0.021231614 = weight(_text_:22 in 2672) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021231614 = score(doc=2672,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13719016 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = 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)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    Date
    22. 2.2009 19:40:38
  14. Guerrini, M.: ¬The functions of the catalogue from ICCP to FRBR (2000) 0.00 
    0.0011760591 = product of:
  0.010584532 = sum of:
    0.010584532 = weight(_text_:of in 3947) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010584532 = score(doc=3947,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.17277241 = fieldWeight in 3947, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3947)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
  15. Oberhauser, O.: Card-Image Public Access Catalogues (CIPACS) : Verbreitung und Charakteristika einer kostengünstigen OPAC-Alternative (2004) 0.00 
    7.0563547E-4 = product of:
  0.0063507194 = sum of:
    0.0063507194 = weight(_text_:of in 2201) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0063507194 = score(doc=2201,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.103663445 = fieldWeight in 2201, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2201)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    Footnote
    Kurzfassung eines Master-Arbeit, Univ. of Central England, Birmingham, 2002, Volltext unter: http://www.ub.tuwien.ac.at/cipacs/d-i.html. Vgl. auch die Übersicht: http://www.ub.tuwien.ac.at/cipacs/c-i.html
  16. Pohl, A.: OCLC, WorldCat und die Metadaten-Kontroverse (2009) 0.00 
    6.652795E-4 = product of:
  0.0059875157 = sum of:
    0.0059875157 = weight(_text_:of in 2780) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0059875157 = score(doc=2780,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.09773483 = fieldWeight in 2780, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2780)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)
    Abstract
    Mit der Ankündigung einer "Policy for Use and Transfer of WorldCat Records" hat OCLC (Online Computer Library Center) in der angelsächsischen Bibliothekswelt eine lebhafte Diskussion hervorgerufen. Im deutschsprachigen Raum hat die geplante Policy allerdings bisher sehr wenig Resonanz gefunden. Ein Grund mag darin liegen, dass OCLC in Europa (noch) deutlich weniger Gewicht hat als in den USA. Sicher hätte das Inkrafttreten einer OCLC-Metadaten-Policy (ganz gleich, wie sie ausgestaltet sein mag) weitreichende Auswirkungen auf das weltweite Bibliothekswesen. Eine Beschäftigung mit dem Thema ist also mehr als angebracht. Dieser Artikel dient dem Zweck, den Stand der Diskussion im angelsächsischen Raum wiederzugeben und einen Einblick in die verschiedenen Aspekte der Auseinandersetzung zu geben.
    Content
    "Hintergründe Das Online Computer Library Center (OCLC) mit Sitz in Dublin (Ohio) präsentiert sich als eine Non-Profit-Mitgliederorganisation, "die sich im öffentlichen Interesse für den breiteren, computergestützten Zugang zum weltweiten Wissen und die Senkung der damit verbundenen Kosten einsetzt." Im globalen Maßstab ist OCLC die größte Organisation im Bibliothekswesen, mit knapp 70.000 Mitgliedsbibliotheken in über 100 Ländern . Das Fundament von OCLC bildet der WorldCat, dessen Konzept dem eines Verbundkatalogs entspricht: eine bibliografische Online-Datenbank für die gemeinsame Katalogisierung, in der auch die Bestandsdaten der beteiligten Bibliotheken erfasst sind. Auf dieser Datenbank baut eine große Zahl der OCLC-Dienstleistungen auf, seien dies Katalogisierungs- und Metadatendienste, Recherchewerkzeuge für Endnutzer, Fernleihdienste oder Bestandsanalyse- und -managementwerkzeuge. Für die Teilnahme am WorldCat sowie die Fremddatenübernahme aus dem WorldCat berechnet OCLC den Mitgliedsinstitutionen nicht unbeträchtliche Summen. Die Einnahmen aus WorldCat-Gebühren und Fremddatendiensten machen mehr als ein Drittel der Gesamteinnahmen OCLCs aus: Im Steuerjahr 2007/2008 betrugen die Einnahmen OCLCs aus Metadatendiensten nach Unternehmensangaben 85,8 Millionen US-$. Das sind knapp 35% der Gesamteinnahmen von 246,4 Millionen US-$ im selben Jahr.6 Man kann OCLC also ein großes finanzielles Interesse daran unterstellen, diesen Datenpool weiterhin unter eigener Kontrolle zu halten, damit die gewohnten Gewinnströme nicht versiegen. Vor diesem Hintergrund nimmt es nicht wunder, dass OCLC versucht eine Policy einzuführen, welche die Geldströme auch in Zukunft sichern soll. Mit der Ankündigung dieser rechtsverbindlichen Regelung hat OCLC Anfang November 2008 die Gemüter kritischer Bibliothekare und von Open-Data-Verfechtern erhitzt. Viele Passagen der Policy erwecken den Eindruck, dass sich OCLC ein Monopol auf die WorldCat-Daten sichern will und Konkurrenz auszuschalten versucht. Die Reaktionen - besonders in der US-amerikanischen Blogosphäre - waren harsch, wodurch bereits einige Änderungen der Policy erreicht worden sind. Mitte Januar hat OCLC nun als Erwiderung auf die vehemente Kritik den geplanten Termin des Inkrafttretens der Policy nach hinten verlegt: von Mitte Februar auf das Dritte Quartal 2009. Mit dem Review "Board of Shared Data Creation and Stewardship" hat OCLC zudem ein Gremium einberufen, das indessen mit OCLC-Mitgliedern und anderen Beteiligten in Kontakt treten soll, um den Policy-Entwurf zu überarbeiten."

Authors

Languages

  • e 58
  • d 12
  • a 2
  • f 1
  • slv 1
  • sp 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 62
  • el 13
  • m 4
  • r 4
  • b 3
  • s 2
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications