Search (71 results, page 4 of 4)

0.0065980507 = product of:
  0.019794151 = sum of:
    0.019794151 = product of:
      0.039588302 = sum of:
        0.039588302 = weight(_text_:classification in 1964) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039588302 = score(doc=1964,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16072905 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05046903 = queryNorm
            0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1964, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1964)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 52(2014) no.2, S.156-180

0.0065980507 = product of:
  0.019794151 = sum of:
    0.019794151 = product of:
      0.039588302 = sum of:
        0.039588302 = weight(_text_:classification in 710) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039588302 = score(doc=710,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16072905 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05046903 = queryNorm
            0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 710, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=710)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 59(2021) no.8, p.794-814

0.006530377 = product of:
  0.01959113 = sum of:
    0.01959113 = product of:
      0.03918226 = sum of:
        0.03918226 = weight(_text_:classification in 1107) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03918226 = score(doc=1107,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.16072905 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05046903 = queryNorm
            0.24377833 = fieldWeight in 1107, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1107)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

In recent years, many school librarians have been scrambling to build and expand their graphic novel collections to meet the large and growing demand for these materials. For the purposes of this study, the term graphic novels refers to volumes in which the content is provided through sequential art, including fiction, nonfiction, and biographical material. As the library field has not yet arrived at a set of best practices or guidelines for institutions working to classify and catalog graphic novels, this study seeks to record the ways in which school librarians are handling these materials as well as issues and questions at the forefront of their minds. A survey of school librarians in the United States revealed that almost all of them collect fiction and nonfiction graphic novels, while 67% collect manga. Most respondents indicated that they are partly or solely responsible for the cataloging and classification decisions made in their media centers. For classification purposes, most have elected to create separate graphic novel collections to house their fictional graphic novels. Some include nonfiction graphic novels in this section, while others create a nonfiction graphic novel collection nearby or shelve nonfiction graphic novels with other items that deal with similar subject matter. Many school librarians express uncertainty about how best to catalog and classify longer series, adapted classics, superhero stories, and the increasing number and variety of inventive titles that defy categorization. They also struggle with inconsistent vendor records and past practices and suffer from a lack of full confidence in their knowledge of how to best classify and catalog graphic novels so that they are both searchable in the library catalog and easily accessible on the shelves.

0.005655472 = product of:
  0.016966416 = sum of:
    0.016966416 = product of:
      0.03393283 = sum of:
        0.03393283 = weight(_text_:classification in 6576) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03393283 = score(doc=6576,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16072905 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05046903 = queryNorm
            0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 6576, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6576)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Series

Cataloging and classification quarterly; vol.29, nos.1/2

0.005655472 = product of:
  0.016966416 = sum of:
    0.016966416 = product of:
      0.03393283 = sum of:
        0.03393283 = weight(_text_:classification in 5499) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03393283 = score(doc=5499,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16072905 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05046903 = queryNorm
            0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 5499, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5499)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 36(2003) no.2, S.89-97

0.005655472 = product of:
  0.016966416 = sum of:
    0.016966416 = product of:
      0.03393283 = sum of:
        0.03393283 = weight(_text_:classification in 5838) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03393283 = score(doc=5838,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16072905 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05046903 = queryNorm
            0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 5838, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5838)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.005655472 = product of:
  0.016966416 = sum of:
    0.016966416 = product of:
      0.03393283 = sum of:
        0.03393283 = weight(_text_:classification in 526) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03393283 = score(doc=526,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16072905 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05046903 = queryNorm
            0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 526, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=526)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 14(1991) no.1, S.3-26

0.005655472 = product of:
  0.016966416 = sum of:
    0.016966416 = product of:
      0.03393283 = sum of:
        0.03393283 = weight(_text_:classification in 1965) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03393283 = score(doc=1965,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16072905 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05046903 = queryNorm
            0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 1965, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1965)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 52(2014) no.1, S.62-68

0.005655472 = product of:
  0.016966416 = sum of:
    0.016966416 = product of:
      0.03393283 = sum of:
        0.03393283 = weight(_text_:classification in 1152) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03393283 = score(doc=1152,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16072905 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05046903 = queryNorm
            0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 1152, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1152)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 61(2023) no.1, p.47-66

0.004712893 = product of:
  0.014138679 = sum of:
    0.014138679 = product of:
      0.028277358 = sum of:
        0.028277358 = weight(_text_:classification in 4548) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.028277358 = score(doc=4548,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16072905 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05046903 = queryNorm
            0.17593184 = fieldWeight in 4548, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4548)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Purpose - The subject description of novels in library catalogues is traditionally limited to the classification number with no description of the story. On the other hand, enthusiastic readers describe novels by tags or reviews in Web services. The purpose of this paper is to analyse readers' descriptions of novels and suggest an enhancement of the catalogue record which would be useful to the readers. Design/methodology/approach - The original research involved a content analysis of tags and reviews written by users in the online bookstore Amazon.com, the online reader advisory service LibraryThing, and the reading promotion project Primorci beremo. The results were compared to previously published results. Findings - The characteristics that most frequently elicit comments by readers are: the names of the creators and literary characters, geographic names and the titles of works, the time frame in which the story takes place, and the literary genre. Their evaluation of a novel was expressed with an opinion, an analysis, or a professional review. Awards were mentioned, and readers often also expressed their personal experience with the novel. They connected the novel with a sequel or series, with otherwise related novels, movies, etc. Often, pictures of the cover and other factual data were included. Research limitations/implications - Research was limited to readers' experiences and descriptions of literary works written in prose. Practical implications - It is suggested that the time frame, genre and awards received should be included in the functional requirements models. Originality/value - Original research was conducted over a longer period of time. The results were re-evaluated and compared to previously published results from studies by different researchers.

0.0032990254 = product of:
  0.009897076 = sum of:
    0.009897076 = product of:
      0.019794151 = sum of:
        0.019794151 = weight(_text_:classification in 4550) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019794151 = score(doc=4550,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16072905 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05046903 = queryNorm
            0.12315229 = fieldWeight in 4550, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=4550)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Purpose - Library Director Jarmo Saarti introduced a wide or ideal model for fiction in literature in his dissertation, published in 1999. It introduces those aspects that should be included in an information system for fiction. Such aspects include literary prose and its intertextual references to other works, the writer, readers' and critics' receptions of the work as well as a researcher's view. It is also important to note how libraries approach a literary work by means of inventory, classification and content description. The most ambiguous of the aspects relates to that context in cultural history, which the work reflects and is a part of. The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach - Since the model consists of several components which are not found in present library information systems and cannot be implemented by them, a new way had to be found to produce, save, process and present fiction-related metadata. The Semantic Computing Research Group of Aalto University has developed several Semantic Web services for use in the field of culture, so cooperation with it and the use of Semantic Web tools were a natural starting point for the construction of the new service. Kirjasampo will be based on the Semantic Web RDF data model. The model enables a flexible linking of metadata derived from different sources, and it can be used to build a Semantic Web that can be approached contextually from different angles. Findings - The "semantically enriched" ideal model for fiction has hence been realised, at least to some extent: Kirjasampo supports literature-related metadata that is more varied than earlier and aims to account for different contexts within literature and connections with regard to other cultural phenomena. It also includes contemporary reviews of works and, as such, readers' receptions as well. Modern readers can share their views on works, once the user interface of the server is completed. It will include several features from the Kirjasto 2.0-application, which enables the evaluation, description and recommendations of works. The service should be online by the end of Spring 2011. Research limitations/implications - The project involves novel collaboration between a public library and a computer science research unit, and utilises a novel approach to the description of fiction. Practical implications - The system encourages user participation in the description of fiction and is of practical benefit to librarians in understanding both how fiction is organised and how users interpret the same. Originality/value - Upon completion, the service will be the first Finnish information system for libraries built with the tools of the Semantic Web which offers a completely new user environment and application for data produced by libraries. It also strives to create a new model for saving and producing data, available to both library professionals and readers. The aim is to save, accumulate and distribute literary knowledge, experiences and silent information.