Search (3 results, page 1 of 1)

0.021485044 = sum of:
  0.009855104 = product of:
    0.039420415 = sum of:
      0.039420415 = weight(_text_:authors in 1429) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.039420415 = score(doc=1429,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.22361259 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049050607 = queryNorm
          0.17628889 = fieldWeight in 1429, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
            0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1429)
    0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.01162994 = product of:
    0.02325988 = sum of:
      0.02325988 = weight(_text_:22 in 1429) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.02325988 = score(doc=1429,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17176686 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.049050607 = queryNorm
          0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 1429, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1429)
    0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Pauline Atherton Cochrane has been contributing to library and information science for fifty years. Think of it-from mid-century to the millennium, from ENIAC (practically) to Internet 11 (almost here). What a time to be in our field! Her work an indexing, subject access, and the user-oriented approach had immediate and sustained impact, and she continues to be one of our most heavily cited authors (see, JASIS, 49[4], 327-55) and most beloved personages. This introduction includes a few words about my own experiences with Pauline as well as a short summary of the contributions that make up this tribute. A review of the curriculum vita provided at the end of this publication Shows that Pauline Cochrane has been involved in a wide variety of work. As Marcia Bates points out in her note (See below), Pauline was (and is) a role model, but I will always think of her as simply the best teacher 1 ever had. In 1997, I entered the University of Illinois Graduate School of Library and Information Science as a returning mid-life student; my previous doctorate had not led to a full-time job and I was re-tooling. I was not sure what 1 would find in library school, and the introductory course attended by more than 100 students from widely varied backgrounds had not yet convinced me I was in the right place. Then, one day, Pauline gave a guest lecture an the digital library in my introductory class. I still remember it. She put up some notes-a few words clustered an the blackboard with some circles and directional arrows-and then she gave a free, seemingly extemporaneous, but riveting narrative. She set out a vision for ideal information exchange in the digital environment but noted a host of practical concerns, issues, and potential problems that required (demanded!) continued human intervention. The lecture brought that class and the entire semester's work into focus; it created tremendous excitement for the future of librarianship. 1 saw that librarians and libraries would play an active role. I was in the right place.

Date

22. 9.1997 19:16:05

0.009968519 = product of:
  0.019937038 = sum of:
    0.019937038 = product of:
      0.039874077 = sum of:
        0.039874077 = weight(_text_:22 in 4183) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039874077 = score(doc=4183,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17176686 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049050607 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4183, 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=4183)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

30. 1.2007 18:22:15

0.007964127 = product of:
  0.015928254 = sum of:
    0.015928254 = product of:
      0.063713014 = sum of:
        0.063713014 = weight(_text_:authors in 4384) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.063713014 = score(doc=4384,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.22361259 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049050607 = queryNorm
            0.28492588 = fieldWeight in 4384, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4384)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This short guide is intended to help librarians and OPAC system designers to make decisions about the design of displays of more than one subject heading. The authors stress that they offer guidance rather than standards or prescriptions; their clear prose is cautious and even the number of recommendations is limited. A 12-page introduction contrasts the "structural approach" and "strict alphabetical approach" to filing, showing examples and stating arguments for each. 7 chapters cover display of subdivisions, inverted headings, display of qualified headings, arrangement of numerical headings, display of subjects interfiled with names and titles, punctuation and messages to the user. Within each chapter, questions involving choices between two or more approaches are followed by brief statements of current practice (LC rules, ALA rules, and systems in existing OPACs) extensive examples demonstrating such choices, and arguments for and against each. The authors warn against ever assuming that the user knows the needed subject headings, and acknowledge that the best OPAC design often depends on the setting and on the user's understanding of the system. Although the topic may be beyond the purview of the authoring committee, the discussion here makes one yearn for interactive OPACs that can analyze the user's needs and provide appropriate guidance to whatever system is adopted