Search (9 results, page 1 of 1)

0.0067615155 = product of:
  0.020284547 = sum of:
    0.020284547 = product of:
      0.040569093 = sum of:
        0.040569093 = weight(_text_:22 in 314) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040569093 = score(doc=314,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1747608 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04990557 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 314, 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=314)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

23. 9.2021 19:12:22

0.00622365 = product of:
  0.01867095 = sum of:
    0.01867095 = weight(_text_:on in 5680) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01867095 = score(doc=5680,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.109763056 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04990557 = queryNorm
        0.17010231 = fieldWeight in 5680, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5680)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Authority control is an important part of cataloging since it helps provide consistent access to names, titles, subjects, and genre/forms. There are a variety of methods for providing authority control, ranging from manual, time-consuming processes to automated processes. However, the automated processes often seem out of reach for small libraries when it comes to using a pricey vendor or expert cataloger. This paper introduces ideas on how to handle authority control using a variety of tools, both paid and free. The author describes how their library handles authority control; compares vendors and programs that can be used to provide varying levels of authority control; and demonstrates authority control using MarcEdit.

0.00622365 = product of:
  0.01867095 = sum of:
    0.01867095 = weight(_text_:on in 707) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01867095 = score(doc=707,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.109763056 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04990557 = queryNorm
        0.17010231 = fieldWeight in 707, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=707)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

This paper discusses the basics of creating name authority records for Arabic personal names in accordance with Resource Description and Access instructions and Program for Cooperative Cataloging guidelines. A background into the use of romanization for non-Latin scripts in bibliographic and authority records is provided to establish the context. Issues with romanization that are particular to Arabic are addressed. Separate sections on modern and classical names provide an overview of the major challenges, and strategies to enhance discovery are outlined. The paper concludes with an examination of the possible benefits of identity management and other changes in the authority control landscape for names in non-Latin script.

0.00622365 = product of:
  0.01867095 = sum of:
    0.01867095 = weight(_text_:on in 1076) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01867095 = score(doc=1076,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.109763056 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04990557 = queryNorm
        0.17010231 = fieldWeight in 1076, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1076)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Authority data has always been at the core of library catalogues. Today, authority data is reference data on a wider scale. The former authorities of the "Sudoc" union catalogue mutated into "IdRef", a read/write platform of open data and services which seeks to become a national supplier of reliable identifiers for French universities. To support their dissemination and comply with high quality standards, Paprika and Qualinka have been added to our toolbox, to expedite the massive and secure linking of scientific publications to IdRef authorities.

0.00622365 = product of:
  0.01867095 = sum of:
    0.01867095 = weight(_text_:on in 1141) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01867095 = score(doc=1141,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.109763056 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04990557 = queryNorm
        0.17010231 = fieldWeight in 1141, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1141)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.00622365 = product of:
  0.01867095 = sum of:
    0.01867095 = weight(_text_:on in 1142) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01867095 = score(doc=1142,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.109763056 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04990557 = queryNorm
        0.17010231 = fieldWeight in 1142, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1142)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

This article outlines the early process and reflects on the experiences of the authors as members of a team creating a Hawaiian knowledge organization system. The authors put forward shared understanding as a process, not a goal, and a way to reimagine and elucidate the process of knowledge organization work. As the project has progressed, team members have embraced their work as not solely knowledge creation and organization, but also communication. The group has identified a metaphorical frame, community agreements, knowledge graphs, and authority record templates as communication tools that are critical to creating a shared space to discuss meaning.

0.00622365 = product of:
  0.01867095 = sum of:
    0.01867095 = weight(_text_:on in 1154) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01867095 = score(doc=1154,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.109763056 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04990557 = queryNorm
        0.17010231 = fieldWeight in 1154, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1154)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

We examined how data provenance and additional information of element values including nomens, and administrative information on the metadata should be modeled and represented in the Resource Description Framework (RDF) for linked data of library catalogs. First, we classified such information types into categories and organized the combination with recording-units, i.e., a description statement or description set. Next, we listed the appropriate RDF representation patterns for each recording-unit. Then, we reviewed the methods to examine such information in Resource Description and Access (RDA) in RDF, BIBFRAME, and Wikidata, and pointed out the issues involved in them.

0.0056345966 = product of:
  0.01690379 = sum of:
    0.01690379 = product of:
      0.03380758 = sum of:
        0.03380758 = weight(_text_:22 in 374) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03380758 = score(doc=374,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1747608 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04990557 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 374, 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=374)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

24. 9.2021 12:22:02

0.0053345575 = product of:
  0.016003672 = sum of:
    0.016003672 = weight(_text_:on in 5483) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016003672 = score(doc=5483,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.109763056 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.04990557 = queryNorm
        0.14580199 = fieldWeight in 5483, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5483)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

We present an overview of Nomenclature's history, characteristics, structure, use, management, development process, limitations, and future. Nomenclature for Museum Cataloging is a bilingual (English/French) structured and controlled list of object terms organized in a classification system to provide a basis for indexing and cataloging collections of human-made objects. It includes illustrations and bibliographic references as well as a user guide. It is used in the creation and management of object records in human history collections within museums and other organizations, and it focuses on objects relevant to North American history and culture. First published in 1978, Nomenclature is the most extensively used museum classification and controlled vocabulary for historical and ethnological collections in North America and represents thereby a de facto standard in the field. An online reference version of Nomenclature was made available in 2018, and it will be available under open license in 2020.