Search (69 results, page 1 of 4)

  • × theme_ss:"Metadaten"
  • × type_ss:"a"
  • × year_i:[2000 TO 2010}
  1. Tennant, R.: ¬A bibliographic metadata infrastructure for the twenty-first century (2004) 0.08
    0.07779312 = product of:
      0.15558624 = sum of:
        0.15558624 = sum of:
          0.086001195 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2845) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.086001195 = score(doc=2845,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                0.045395818 = queryNorm
              0.4866305 = fieldWeight in 2845, product of:
                2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                  4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2845)
          0.06958504 = weight(_text_:22 in 2845) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.06958504 = score(doc=2845,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.15896842 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.045395818 = queryNorm
              0.4377287 = fieldWeight in 2845, product of:
                2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                  4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2845)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    The current library bibliographic infrastructure was constructed in the early days of computers - before the Web, XML, and a variety of other technological advances that now offer new opportunities. General requirements of a modern metadata infrastructure for libraries are identified, including such qualities as versatility, extensibility, granularity, and openness. A new kind of metadata infrastructure is then proposed that exhibits at least some of those qualities. Some key challenges that must be overcome to implement a change of this magnitude are identified.
    Date
    9.12.2005 19:22:38
    Source
    Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2, S.175-181
  2. Taniguchi, S.: Recording evidence in bibliographic records and descriptive metadata (2005) 0.06
    0.06406054 = product of:
      0.12812108 = sum of:
        0.12812108 = sum of:
          0.09121804 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 3565) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.09121804 = score(doc=3565,freq=8.0), product of:
              0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                0.045395818 = queryNorm
              0.5161496 = fieldWeight in 3565, product of:
                2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                  8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3565)
          0.03690304 = weight(_text_:22 in 3565) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.03690304 = score(doc=3565,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.15896842 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.045395818 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3565, 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=3565)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    In this article recording evidence for data values in addition to the values themselves in bibliographic records and descriptive metadata is proposed, with the aim of improving the expressiveness and reliability of those records and metadata. Recorded evidence indicates why and how data values are recorded for elements. Recording the history of changes in data values is also proposed, with the aim of reinforcing recorded evidence. First, evidence that can be recorded is categorized into classes: identifiers of rules or tasks, action descriptions of them, and input and output data of them. Dates of recording values and evidence are an additional class. Then, the relative usefulness of evidence classes and also levels (i.e., the record, data element, or data value level) to which an individual evidence class is applied, is examined. Second, examples that can be viewed as recorded evidence in existing bibliographic records and current cataloging rules are shown. Third, some examples of bibliographic records and descriptive metadata with notes of evidence are demonstrated. Fourth, ways of using recorded evidence are addressed.
    Date
    18. 6.2005 13:16:22
  3. Carvalho, J.R. de; Cordeiro, M.I.; Lopes, A.; Vieira, M.: Meta-information about MARC : an XML framework for validation, explanation and help systems (2004) 0.05
    0.048132036 = product of:
      0.09626407 = sum of:
        0.09626407 = sum of:
          0.053210527 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2848) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.053210527 = score(doc=2848,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                0.045395818 = queryNorm
              0.30108726 = fieldWeight in 2848, 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=2848)
          0.043053545 = weight(_text_:22 in 2848) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.043053545 = score(doc=2848,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.15896842 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.045395818 = queryNorm
              0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2848, 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=2848)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    This article proposes a schema for meta-information about MARC that can express at a fairly comprehensive level the syntactic and semantic aspects of MARC formats in XML, including not only rules but also all texts and examples that are conveyed by MARC documentation. It can be thought of as an XML version of the MARC or UNIMARC manuals, for both machine and human usage. The article explains how such a schema can be the central piece of a more complete framework, to be used in conjunction with "slim" record formats, providing a rich environment for the automated processing of bibliographic data.
    Source
    Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2, S.131-137
  4. Vellucci, S.L.: Metadata and authority control (2000) 0.05
    0.048132036 = product of:
      0.09626407 = sum of:
        0.09626407 = sum of:
          0.053210527 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 180) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.053210527 = score(doc=180,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                0.045395818 = queryNorm
              0.30108726 = fieldWeight in 180, 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=180)
          0.043053545 = weight(_text_:22 in 180) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.043053545 = score(doc=180,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.15896842 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.045395818 = queryNorm
              0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 180, 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=180)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    A variety of information communities have developed metadata schemes to meet the needs of their own users. The ability of libraries to incorporate and use multiple metadata schemes in current library systems will depend on the compatibility of imported data with existing catalog data. Authority control will play an important role in metadata interoperability. In this article, I discuss factors for successful authority control in current library catalogs, which include operation in a well-defined and bounded universe, application of principles and standard practices to access point creation, reference to authoritative lists, and bibliographic record creation by highly trained individuals. Metadata characteristics and environmental models are examined and the likelihood of successful authority control is explored for a variety of metadata environments.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  5. Banush, D.; Kurth, M:; Pajerek, J.: Rehabilitating killer serials : an automated strategy for maintaining E-journal metadata (2005) 0.04
    0.04225164 = product of:
      0.08450328 = sum of:
        0.08450328 = sum of:
          0.053750746 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 124) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.053750746 = score(doc=124,freq=4.0), product of:
              0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                0.045395818 = queryNorm
              0.30414405 = 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)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=124)
          0.030752534 = weight(_text_:22 in 124) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.030752534 = score(doc=124,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.15896842 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.045395818 = queryNorm
              0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 124, 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=124)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Cornell University Library (CUL) has developed a largely automated method for providing title-level catalog access to electronic journals made available through aggregator packages. CUL's technique for automated e-journal record creation and maintenance relies largely on the conversion of externally supplied metadata into streamlined, abbreviated-level MARC records. Unlike the Cooperative Online Serials Cataloging Program's recently implemented aggregator-neutral approach to e-journal cataloging, CUL's method involves the creation of a separate bibliographic record for each version of an e-journal title in order to facilitate automated record maintenance. An indexed local field indicates the aggregation to which each title belongs and enables machine manipulation of all the records associated with a specific aggregation. Information encoded in another locally defined field facilitates the identification of all of the library's e-journal titles and allows for the automatic generation of a Web-based title list of e-journals. CUL's approach to providing title-level catalog access to its e-journal aggregations involves a number of tradeoffs in which some elements of traditional bibliographic description (such as subject headings and linking fields) are sacrificed in the interest of timeliness and affordability. URLs (Uniform Resource Locators) and holdings information are updated on a regular basis by use of automated methods that save on staff costs.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  6. Franklin, R.A.: Re-inventing subject access for the semantic web (2003) 0.04
    0.04125603 = product of:
      0.08251206 = sum of:
        0.08251206 = sum of:
          0.04560902 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2556) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.04560902 = score(doc=2556,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                0.045395818 = queryNorm
              0.2580748 = fieldWeight in 2556, 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=2556)
          0.03690304 = weight(_text_:22 in 2556) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.03690304 = score(doc=2556,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.15896842 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.045395818 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2556, 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=2556)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    First generation scholarly research on the Web lacked a firm system of authority control. Second generation Web research is beginning to model subject access with library science principles of bibliographic control and cataloguing. Harnessing the Web and organising the intellectual content with standards and controlled vocabulary provides precise search and retrieval capability, increasing relevance and efficient use of technology. Dublin Core metadata standards permit a full evaluation and cataloguing of Web resources appropriate to highly specific research needs and discovery. Current research points to a type of structure based on a system of faceted classification. This system allows the semantic and syntactic relationships to be defined. Controlled vocabulary, such as the Library of Congress Subject Headings, can be assigned, not in a hierarchical structure, but rather as descriptive facets of relating concepts. Web design features such as this are adding value to discovery and filtering out data that lack authority. The system design allows for scalability and extensibility, two technical features that are integral to future development of the digital library and resource discovery.
    Date
    30.12.2008 18:22:46
  7. Hsieh-Yee, I.: Cataloging and metatdata education in North American LIS programs (2004) 0.03
    0.034380026 = product of:
      0.06876005 = sum of:
        0.06876005 = sum of:
          0.03800752 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 138) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.03800752 = score(doc=138,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                0.045395818 = queryNorm
              0.21506234 = fieldWeight in 138, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=138)
          0.030752534 = weight(_text_:22 in 138) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.030752534 = score(doc=138,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.15896842 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.045395818 = queryNorm
              0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 138, 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=138)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    This paper presents findings of a survey an the state of cataloging and metadata education. in ALA-accredited library and information science progranis in North America. The survey was conducted in response to Action Item 5.1 of the "Bibliographic Control of Web Resources: A Library of Congress Action Plan," which focuses an providing metadata education to new LIS professionals. The study found LIS programs increased their reliance an introductory courses to cover cataloging and metadata, but fewer programs than before had a cataloging course requirement. The knowledge of cataloging delivered in introductory courses was basic, and the coverage of metadata was limited to an overview. Cataloging courses showed similarity in coverage and practice and focused an print mater!als. Few cataloging educators provided exercises in metadata record creation using non-AACR standards. Advanced cataloging courses provided in-depth coverage of subject cataloging and the cataloging of nonbook resources, but offered very limited coverage of metadata. Few programs offered full courses an metadata, and even fewer offered advanced metadata courses. Metadata topics were well integrated into LIS curricula, but coverage of metadata courses varied from program to program, depending an the interests of instructors. Educators were forward-looking and agreed an the inclusion of specific knowledge and skills in metadata instruction. A series of actions were proposed to assist educators in providing students with competencies in cataloging and metadata.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  8. Gömpel, R.; Altenhöner, R.; Kunz, M.; Oehlschläger, S.; Werner, C.: Weltkongress Bibliothek und Information, 70. IFLA-Generalkonferenz in Buenos Aires : Aus den Veranstaltungen der Division IV Bibliographic Control, der Core Activities ICABS und UNIMARC sowie der Information Technology Section (2004) 0.03
    0.028955016 = product of:
      0.057910033 = sum of:
        0.057910033 = sum of:
          0.04560902 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2874) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.04560902 = score(doc=2874,freq=18.0), product of:
              0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                0.045395818 = queryNorm
              0.2580748 = fieldWeight in 2874, product of:
                4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                  18.0 = termFreq=18.0
                3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2874)
          0.012301013 = weight(_text_:22 in 2874) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.012301013 = score(doc=2874,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.15896842 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.045395818 = queryNorm
              0.07738023 = fieldWeight in 2874, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2874)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    "Libraries: Tools for Education and Development" war das Motto der 70. IFLA-Generalkonferenz, dem Weltkongress Bibliothek und Information, der vom 22.-27. August 2004 in Buenos Aires, Argentinien, und damit erstmals in Lateinamerika stattfand. Rund 3.000 Teilnehmerinnen und Teilnehmer, davon ein Drittel aus spanischsprachigen Ländern, allein 600 aus Argentinien, besuchten die von der IFLA und dem nationalen Organisationskomitee gut organisierte Tagung mit mehr als 200 Sitzungen und Veranstaltungen. Aus Deutschland waren laut Teilnehmerverzeichnis leider nur 45 Kolleginnen und Kollegen angereist, womit ihre Zahl wieder auf das Niveau von Boston gesunken ist. Erfreulicherweise gab es nunmehr bereits im dritten Jahr eine deutschsprachige Ausgabe des IFLA-Express. Auch in diesem Jahr soll hier über die Veranstaltungen der Division IV Bibliographic Control berichtet werden. Die Arbeit der Division mit ihren Sektionen Bibliography, Cataloguing, Classification and Indexing sowie der neuen Sektion Knowledge Management bildet einen der Schwerpunkte der IFLA-Arbeit, die dabei erzielten konkreten Ergebnisse und Empfehlungen haben maßgeblichen Einfluss auf die tägliche Arbeit der Bibliothekarinnen und Bibliothekare. Erstmals wird auch ausführlich über die Arbeit der Core Activities ICABS und UNIMARC und der Information Technology Section berichtet.
    Content
    Bibliography Section (Sektion Bibliographie) Die Sektion befasst sich mit Inhalt, Aufbau, Produktion, Verteilung und Erhaltung von bibliographischen Informationen, in erster Linie, aber nicht ausschließlich bezogen auf Nationalbibliographien. Sie fördert die "Universal Bibliographic Control (UBC)" durch die Verbreitung von Standards und praktischen Anwendungsbeispielen.
    Cataloguing Section (Sektion Katalogisierung) Der Schwerpunkt der Arbeit dieser Sektion liegt auf der Erarbeitung bzw. internationalen Harmonisierung von Strukturen, Regeln und Arbeitsverfahren mit dem Ziel, die internationale Kooperation im Katalogisierungsbereich zu verbessern. In Anbetracht des laufenden Evaluierungsprozesses wurde der Strategieplan der Sektion zum jetzigen Zeitpunkt nur dort aktualisiert, wo es unbedingt erforderlich war. Neue Ziele wurden nicht aufgenommen. Oberste Priorität bei den strategischen Zielen behielt die Entwicklung internationaler Katalogisierungsstandards für die bibliographische Beschreibung und den Zugriff. In ihrer zentralen Bedeutung bestätigt wurden auch die "Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records" (FRBR). Darüber hinaus gehört auch in Zukunft die Weiterentwicklung und Revision der ISBDs zu den zentralen Anliegen der Arbeit der Sektion Katalogisierung. Ein weiteres vorrangiges Ziel bleibt die Erarbeitung von Standards, Regeln und Informationslisten, um den Zugang zu bibliographischen Daten in allen Sprachen zu ermöglichen. Hierzu zählen u. a.: - die vollständige Veröffentlichung der Anonymous Classics: Der Teil für europäische Literatur ist inzwischen veröffentlicht'. Für die Erarbeitung weiterer Teile (Lateinamerika, Afrika und Asien) soll das Verfahren gestrafft und ein Zeitplan erstellt werden. - die Beobachtung der Aktivitäten zu Unicode und die Information der Sektionsmitglieder darüber zur Förderung des mehrsprachigen Zugangs zu bibliographischer Information - die Entwicklung eines web-basierten multilingualen Wörterbuchs für Katalogisierungsbegriffe - die Entwicklung und der Test von (Daten-)Modellen für eine virtuelle internationale Normdatei - die Überarbeitung der "IFLA Names of persons". Das Open Programme der Sektion stand in diesem Jahr unter dem Motto "Developments in Cataloguing Guidelines" und wurde von Barbara Tillett, Lynne Howarth und Carol van Nuys bestritten. Lynne Howarth ging in ihrem Vortrag "Enabling metadata: creating a core record for resource discovery" auf die Reaktionen im weltweiten Stellungnahmeverfahren auf die Veröffentlichung des Papiers "Guidance an the Structure, Content and Application of Metadata Records for digital resources and collections" der Working Group an the Use of Metadata Schemes ein. Carol van Nuys stellte das norwegische "Paradigma Project and its quest for metadata solutions and services" vor.
    Classification and Indexing Section (Sektion Klassifikation und Indexierung) Die Working Group an Guidelines for Multilingual Thesauri hat ihre Arbeit abgeschlossen, die Richtlinien werden Ende 2004 im IFLAnet zur Verfügung stehen. Die 2003 ins Leben gerufene Arbeitsgruppe zu Mindeststandards der Inhaltserschließung in Nationalbibliographien hat sich in Absprache mit den Mitgliedern des Standing Committee auf den Namen "Guidelines for minimal requirements for subject access by national bibliographic agencies" verständigt. Als Grundlage der zukünftigen Arbeit soll der "Survey an Subject Heading Languages Used in National Libraries and Bibliographies" von Magda HeinerFreiling dienen. Davon ausgehend soll eruiert werden, welche Arten von Medienwerken mit welchen Instrumentarien und in welcher Tiefe erschlossen werden. Eine weitere Arbeitsgruppe der Sektion befasst sich mit dem sachlichen Zugriff auf Netzpublikationen (Working Group an Subject Access to Web Resources). Die Veranstaltung "Implementation and adaption of global tools for subject access to local needs" fand regen Zuspruch. Drei Vortragende zeigten auf, wie in ihrem Sprachgebiet die Subject Headings der Library of Congress (LoC) übernommen werden (Development of a Spanish subject heading list und Subject indexing in Sweden) bzw. wie sich die Zusammenarbeit mit der LoC gestalten lässt, um den besonderen terminologischen Bedürfnissen eines Sprach- und Kulturraums außerhalb der USA Rechnung zu tragen (The SACO Program in Latin America). Aus deutscher Sicht verdiente der Vortrag "Subject indexing between international standards and local context - the Italian case" besondere Beachtung. Die Entwicklung eines Regelwerks zur verbalen Sacherschließung und die Erarbeitung einer italienischen Schlagwortnormdatei folgen nämlich erklärtermaßen der deutschen Vorgehensweise mit RSWK und SWD.
    Knowledge Management Section (Sektion Wissensmanagement) Ziel der neuen Sektion ist es, die Entwicklung und Implementierung des Wissensmanagements in Bibliotheken und Informationszentren zu fördern. Die Sektion will dafür eine internationale Plattform für die professionelle Kommunikation bieten und damit das Thema bekannter und allgemein verständlicher machen. Auf diese Weise soll seine Bedeutung auch für Bibliotheken und die mit ihm arbeitenden Einrichtungen herausgestellt werden. IFLA-CDNL Alliance for Bibliographic Standards (ICABS) Ein Jahr nach ihrer Gründung in Berlin hat die IFLA Core Activity "IFLA-CDNL Alliance for Bibliographic Standards (ICABS)" in Buenos Aires zum ersten Mal das Spektrum ihrer Arbeitsfelder einem großen Fachpublikum vorgestellt. Die IFLA Core Activity UNIMARC, einer der Partner der Allianz, hatte am Donnerstagvormittag zu einer Veranstaltung unter dem Titel "The holdings record as a bibliographic control tool" geladen. Am Nachmittag des selben Tages fand unter dem Titel "The new IFLA-CDNL Alliance for Bibliographic Standards - umbrella for multifaceted activities: strategies and practical ways to improve international coordination" die umfassende ICABS-Veranstaltung statt, die von der Generaldirektorin Der Deutschen Bibliothek, Dr. Elisabeth Niggemann, moderiert wurde. Nachdem die Vorsitzende des Advisory Board in ihrem Vortrag auf die Entstehungsgeschichte der Allianz eingegangen war, gab sie einen kurzen Oberblick über die Organisation und die Arbeit von ICABS als Dach der vielfältigen Aktivitäten im Bereich bibliographischer Standards. Vertreter aller in ICABS zusammengeschlossener Bibliotheken stellten im Anschluss daran ihre Arbeitsbereiche und -ergebnisse vor.
  9. Siripan, P.: Metadata and trends of cataloguing in Thai libraries (2000) 0.03
    0.026605263 = product of:
      0.053210527 = sum of:
        0.053210527 = product of:
          0.10642105 = sum of:
            0.10642105 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 6338) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.10642105 = score(doc=6338,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045395818 = queryNorm
                0.6021745 = fieldWeight in 6338, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6338)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Source
    International cataloguing and bibliographic control. 29(2000) no.2, S.33-35
  10. Howarth, L.C.: Report on the Metadata Workshop IFLA 2000 Conference Jerusalem, Israel, Thursday 17 August 2000 (2001) 0.03
    0.026605263 = product of:
      0.053210527 = sum of:
        0.053210527 = product of:
          0.10642105 = sum of:
            0.10642105 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 3798) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.10642105 = score(doc=3798,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045395818 = queryNorm
                0.6021745 = fieldWeight in 3798, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=3798)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Source
    International cataloguing and bibliographic control. 30(2001) no.3, S.55-56
  11. Howarth, L.: Metadata and bibliographic control : soul-mates or two solitudes? (2005) 0.03
    0.025496218 = product of:
      0.050992437 = sum of:
        0.050992437 = product of:
          0.10198487 = sum of:
            0.10198487 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 5728) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.10198487 = score(doc=5728,freq=10.0), product of:
                0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045395818 = queryNorm
                0.5770728 = fieldWeight in 5728, product of:
                  3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                    10.0 = termFreq=10.0
                  3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5728)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    The historical interweaving of evolving trends and applications in metadata and bibliographic control seems largely absent from the literature. To address this apparent gap in perspective, we trace some historic and more recent developments related to each, and speculate on future directions. Cataloguing rules are ancestors to the current lineage of bibliographic standards. Metadata schemas have been developed to meet the needs of particular fields or domains and to support a variety of functions related to resource discovery. While differences between the tools of bibliographic control and of metadata application still remain, the similarities have become sufficient to warrant a confluence in terminology and definition. While internationally determined codes and standards have fostered the goal of universal bibliographic control, syntactic structures, semantic element sets, transmission protocols, cross-schema mappings, and metadata harvesting tools have been instrumental to realizing the concept of interoperability.
  12. Andresen, L.: Metadata in Denmark (2000) 0.02
    0.024602026 = product of:
      0.04920405 = sum of:
        0.04920405 = product of:
          0.0984081 = sum of:
            0.0984081 = weight(_text_:22 in 4899) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0984081 = score(doc=4899,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15896842 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045395818 = queryNorm
                0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 4899, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4899)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    16. 7.2000 20:58:22
  13. Miksa, S.D.; Moen, WE.; Snyder, G.; Polyakov, S.; Eklund, A.: Metadata assistance of the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Record's four user tasks : a report on the MARC content designation utilization (MCDU) project (2006) 0.02
    0.02280451 = product of:
      0.04560902 = sum of:
        0.04560902 = product of:
          0.09121804 = sum of:
            0.09121804 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 125) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.09121804 = score(doc=125,freq=18.0), product of:
                0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045395818 = queryNorm
                0.5161496 = fieldWeight in 125, product of:
                  4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                    18.0 = termFreq=18.0
                  3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=125)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    This paper describes the work of the MARC Content Designation Utilization (MCDU) Project, funded by a National Leadership Grant from the U.S. Federal Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS). The MCDU Project is analyzing approximately 56 million MARC 21 Format for Bibliographic Data records from OCLC's WorldCat database to identify actual use of the content designation available in the MARC bibliographic record. We consider bibliographic records as artifacts resulting from the overall cataloging enterprise, of which the encoding of the bibliographic data into MARC is only one part. Concepts from the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) can be used to examine and critically assess the availability of bibliographic data in these records, data meant to assist end users in finding, identifying, selecting, and obtaining relevant information resources. Overall, the MCDU Project will provide empirical data reflecting the actual use of MARC content designation structures in this set of records. Specifically, the data can be used to demonstrate how catalogers' coding of bibliographic data may or may not assist end users in these four tasks. The project is using the mapping by Delsey of MARC data elements to FRBR user tasks in this analysis. These data are crucial for making decisions about the future of MARC and may inform current work on bibliographic rules reflected in the development of the next version of cataloging rules (i.e., Resource Description and Access) by the Joint Steering Committee for the Revision of the Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules.
  14. Moen, W.E.: ¬The metadata approach to accessing government information (2001) 0.02
    0.021526773 = product of:
      0.043053545 = sum of:
        0.043053545 = product of:
          0.08610709 = sum of:
            0.08610709 = weight(_text_:22 in 4407) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.08610709 = score(doc=4407,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.15896842 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045395818 = queryNorm
                0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 4407, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4407)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    28. 3.2002 9:22:34
  15. Hillmann, D.: Metadata quality : from evaluation to augmentation (2008) 0.02
    0.018812763 = product of:
      0.037625525 = sum of:
        0.037625525 = product of:
          0.07525105 = sum of:
            0.07525105 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 800) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07525105 = score(doc=800,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045395818 = queryNorm
                0.4258017 = fieldWeight in 800, 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=800)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    The conversation about metadata quality has developed slowly in libraries, hindered by unexamined assumptions about metadata carrying over from experience in the MARC environment. In the wider world, discussions about functionality must drive discussions about how quality might be determined and ensured. Because the quality-enforcing structures present in the MARC world-mature standards, common documentation, and bibliographic utilities-are lacking in the metadata world, metadata practitioners desiring to improve the quality of metadata used in their libraries must develop and proliferate their own processes of evaluation and transformation to support essential interoperability. In this article, the author endeavors to describe how those processes might be established and sustained to support metadata quality improvement.
    Footnote
    Beitrag eines Themenheftes "Bibliographic database quality"
  16. Tillett, B.B.: AACR2 and metadata : library opportunities in the global semantic Web (2003) 0.02
    0.016125225 = product of:
      0.03225045 = sum of:
        0.03225045 = product of:
          0.0645009 = sum of:
            0.0645009 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 5510) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0645009 = score(doc=5510,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045395818 = queryNorm
                0.3649729 = fieldWeight in 5510, 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=5510)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Explores the opportunities for libraries to contribute to the proposed global "Semantic Web." Library name and subject authority files, including work that IFLA has done related to a new view of "Universal Bibliographic Control" in the Internet environment and the work underway in the U.S. and Europe, are making a reality of the virtual international authority file on the Web. The bibliographic and authority records created according to AACR2 reflect standards for metadata that libraries have provided for years. New opportunities for using these records in the digital world are described (interoperability), including mapping with Dublin Core metadata. AACR2 recently updated Chapter 9 on Electronic Resources. That process and highlights of the changes are described, including Library of Congress' rule interpretations.
  17. Smiraglia, R.P.: Content metadata : an analysis of Etruscan artifacts in a museum of archeology (2005) 0.02
    0.016125225 = product of:
      0.03225045 = sum of:
        0.03225045 = product of:
          0.0645009 = sum of:
            0.0645009 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 176) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0645009 = score(doc=176,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045395818 = queryNorm
                0.3649729 = fieldWeight in 176, 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=176)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Metadata schemes target resources as information-packages, without attention to the distinction between content and carrier. Most schema are derived without empirical understanding of the concepts that need to be represented, the ways in which terms representing the central concepts might best be derived, and how metadata descriptions will be used for retrieval. Research is required to resolve this dilemma, and much research will be required if the plethora of schemes that already exist are to be made efficacious for resource description and retrieval. Here I report the results of a preliminary study, which was designed to see whether the bibliographic concept of "the work" could be of any relevance among artifacts held by a museum. I extend the "works metaphor" from the bibliographic to the artifactual domain, by altering the terms of the definition slightly, thus: 1) instantiation is understood as content genealogy. Case studies of Etruscan artifacts from the University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology are used to demonstrate the inherence of the work in non-documentary artifacts.
  18. Cordeiro, M.I.: From library authority control to network authoritative metadata sources (2003) 0.01
    0.0134376865 = product of:
      0.026875373 = sum of:
        0.026875373 = product of:
          0.053750746 = sum of:
            0.053750746 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 3083) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.053750746 = score(doc=3083,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045395818 = queryNorm
                0.30414405 = fieldWeight in 3083, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3083)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Authority control is a quite recent term in the long history of cataloguing, although the underlying principle is among the very early principles of bibliographic control. Bibliographic control is a Field in transformation by the rapid expansion of the WWW, which has brought new problems to infonnation discovery and retrieval, creating new challenges and requirements in information management. In a comprehensive approach, authority control is presented as one of the most promising library activities in this respect. The evolution of work methods and standards for the sharing of authority files is reviewed, showing the imbalance in developments and practical achievements between name and subject authority, in an international perspective. The need to improve the network availability and usability of authority information assets in more effective and holistic ways is underlyned; and a new philosophy and scope is proposed for library authority work, based an the primacy of the linking function of authority data, and by expanding the finding, relating and informing functions of authority records. Some of these aspects are being addressed in several projects dealing with knowledge organization systems, notably to cope with multilingual needs and to enable semantic interoperability among different systems. Library practice itself should evolve in the same direction, thereby providing practical experience to inform new or improved principles and standards for authority work, while contributing to enhance local information services and to promote their involvement in the WWW environment.
  19. Strötgen, R.: Treatment of semantic heterogeneity using meta-data extraction and query translation (2002) 0.01
    0.013302632 = product of:
      0.026605263 = sum of:
        0.026605263 = product of:
          0.053210527 = sum of:
            0.053210527 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 3595) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.053210527 = score(doc=3595,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045395818 = queryNorm
                0.30108726 = fieldWeight in 3595, 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=3595)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    The project CARMEN ("Content Analysis, Retrieval and Metadata: Effective Networking") aimed - among other goals - at improving the expansion of searches in bibliographic databases into Internet searches. We pursued a set of different approaches to the treatment of semantic heterogeneity (meta-data extraction, query translation using statistic relations and Cross-concordances). This paper describes the concepts and implementation of these approaches and the evaluation of the impact for the retrieval result.
  20. Aulik, J.L.; Burt, H.A.; Gruby, E.; Morgan, A.; O'Halloran, C.: Online mentoring : a student experience at Dominican University (2002) 0.01
    0.013302632 = product of:
      0.026605263 = sum of:
        0.026605263 = product of:
          0.053210527 = sum of:
            0.053210527 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 5465) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.053210527 = score(doc=5465,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.045395818 = queryNorm
                0.30108726 = fieldWeight in 5465, 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=5465)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    This paper explores the online learning experience of seven students in the Graduate School of Library and Information Science at Dominican University. In a class entitled Metadata for Internet Resources, the students developed a distance learning relationship with professional catalogers. Student assignments included posting bibliographic records on the WebBoardTM for mentor input. In an online exchange, the mentors responded by posting their suggestions for improving student records. The interaction between students and mentors is discussed, as is the educational value of distance learning.

Languages

  • e 64
  • d 5
  • More… Less…

Types