Search (45 results, page 2 of 3)

0.001823924 = product of:
  0.003647848 = sum of:
    0.003647848 = product of:
      0.007295696 = sum of:
        0.007295696 = weight(_text_:a in 5599) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.007295696 = score(doc=5599,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041389145 = queryNorm
            0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 5599, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5599)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This paper looks at changes affecting LCSH over its 100-year history. Adopting a linguistic conceptualization, it frames these changes as relating to the semantics, syntax and pragmatics of the LCSH language. While its category semantics has remained stable over time, the LCSH relational semantics underwent a significant upheaval when a thesaural structure was imposed upon its traditional See and See also structure. Over time the LCSH syntax has become increasingly complex as it has moved from being largely enumerative to in large part synthetic. Until fairly recently the LCSH pragmatics consisted of only one rule, viz, the injunction to assign specific headings. This rule, always controversial, has become even more debated and interpreted with the move to the online environment

Type

a

0.001823924 = product of:
  0.003647848 = sum of:
    0.003647848 = product of:
      0.007295696 = sum of:
        0.007295696 = weight(_text_:a in 5602) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.007295696 = score(doc=5602,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041389145 = queryNorm
            0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 5602, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5602)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This paper looks at changes affecting LCSH over its 100-year history. Adopting a linguistic conceptualization, it frames these changes as relating to the semantics, syntax and pragmatics of the LCSH language. While its category semantics has remained stable over time, the LCSH relational semantics underwent a significant upheaval when a thesaural structure was imposed upon its traditional See and See also structure. Over time the LCSH syntax has become increasingly complex as it has moved from being largely enumerative to in large part synthetic. Until fairly recently the LCSH pragmatics consisted of only one rule, viz, the injunction to assign specific headings. This rule, always controversial, has become even more debated and interpreted with the move to the online environment

Type

a

0.001823924 = product of:
  0.003647848 = sum of:
    0.003647848 = product of:
      0.007295696 = sum of:
        0.007295696 = weight(_text_:a in 5919) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.007295696 = score(doc=5919,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041389145 = queryNorm
            0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 5919, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5919)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

An understanding of the workings of Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH) is one of the most valuable conceptual tools a researcher can have. The subject heading system is by no means obvious or self-evident, however; it must be taught, explained, and exemplified by librarians. Several points must be covered explicitly. The cross-reference notation of UF, BT, RT, SA, and NT has to be explained; the importance of choosing the most specific heading available, rather than a general term, must also be emphasized. There are four ways to find the most specific LCSH terms for a particular topic; two of them come from using the red books, two from using the online catalog itself. All four ways are important; none is obvious. Each must be taught

Type

a

0.001823924 = product of:
  0.003647848 = sum of:
    0.003647848 = product of:
      0.007295696 = sum of:
        0.007295696 = weight(_text_:a in 6576) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.007295696 = score(doc=6576,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041389145 = queryNorm
            0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 6576, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6576)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The nature of a library's collections determines what kind of subject access to provide to those collections. The collections of the Cleveland Public Library serve both the recreational and research needs of a large urban population. The Cleveland Public Library uses Library of Congress Subject Headings to describe its collections. A study of subject searches entered by library patrons over the course of one week reveals several patterns among the types of subject headings used most frequently, reflecting the characteristics of the population served. Other topics discussed include subject access to fiction, juvenileliterature, and specialized collections

Type

a

0.001823924 = product of:
  0.003647848 = sum of:
    0.003647848 = product of:
      0.007295696 = sum of:
        0.007295696 = weight(_text_:a in 421) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.007295696 = score(doc=421,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041389145 = queryNorm
            0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 421, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=421)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Type

a

0.001823924 = product of:
  0.003647848 = sum of:
    0.003647848 = product of:
      0.007295696 = sum of:
        0.007295696 = weight(_text_:a in 5427) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.007295696 = score(doc=5427,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041389145 = queryNorm
            0.15287387 = fieldWeight in 5427, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5427)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The syntactic and semantic consistency of the subject headings of Library of Congress is a matter of concern to cataloguers who must use appropriate terminologies to describe library materials undergoing processing. This paper looks at the structure of these headings by analyzing comparatively the syntactic types that make up the structures as listed in Literature and Librarianship on pages 3075 to 3085 and 3114 to 3117 respectively. Their semantic implications are also highlighted. Consistency and specificity are terms often used in criticizing LCSH. This paper examines the application of these two concepts on the structures believing that a thorough understanding of the syntactic types would help the cataloguer to determine the most appropriate and specific heading to use.

Type

a

0.0017643708 = product of:
  0.0035287417 = sum of:
    0.0035287417 = product of:
      0.0070574833 = sum of:
        0.0070574833 = weight(_text_:a in 5042) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0070574833 = score(doc=5042,freq=22.0), product of:
            0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041389145 = queryNorm
            0.14788237 = fieldWeight in 5042, product of:
              4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
                22.0 = termFreq=22.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=5042)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Work on a prototype of the new Soggettario (the main Italian subject heading list) has begun in October 2004 at the Central National Library of Florence (BNCF). BNCF is involving in the renewal of the most used subject indexing tool of Italian libraries. The project had already produced a Feasibility Study, representing a reference for the works which have started recently. An Italian abstract of the Feasibility Study, and more documentation, can be found in the BCNF website at the Web address <http://www bncf.firenze.sbn.it/progetti/>. Together with the project team and the BNCF staff, some young external consultants are working, who are focusing on the terminological component of the system, namely the prototype of the Thesaurus. At the same time, documents are produced which define procedures, establish criteria, and give guidelines. The list of items by which the prototype started consists of: - the terms included in the updates provided by the Italian National Bibliography (BNI) during the period 1986-1998 (already published in the form of lists); - the items introduced from 1999 to 2005 - other items introduced in the past years but never recorded; - some terms from the Soggettario (1956) or from BNI updates (1956-19S5), being especially outdated and needing revision. In building the semantic networks and the hierarchies, and in making the terminological control, of course, more terms have to be included, which come from the Soggettario, the BNI and other authoritative sources both catalographic (various indexing tools) and lexicographic (general and special directories). DDC numbers are also related to the terms in the Thesaurus. The prototype, to be completed in April 2006, will include a sample of terms for each disciplinary area. About 5000 terms will have a complete structure, but 6000 more will be included in the Thesaurus in order to fill the semantic networks, and marked with a different working status. For the prototype the AgroVoc software is used, which has been provided by FAO and adapted by the BNCF computing staff in order to match the specific requirements of the project. Thanks to the potential of this software, we intend to test in future on the multilingual side of terminology. Such work is likely to begin by testing links to the corresponding forms used by the Library of Congress. We are currently beginning to focus on this, and we wish that external parties be involved which are concerned with multilingual terminology in more or less specialistic contexts. We will follow the road of conventions with Italian universities, which could cooperate to this development through their students and graded students. We are also looking at the developments in the work of the British BSI working group on standards for thesauri convened by Stella Dextre Clarke.
Testing on the syntactic component of the language is in progress, carried out by a team working on the basis of some terms of the Thesaurus which have been identified for possessing some special features. This will maybe lead to some changes and simplifications in the original structures coming from the GRIS model <http://wwwaib.it/aib/commiss/gris/ guida.htm> and the Feasibility Study. Within June 2006, two basic documents will be published: - a paper volume containing the Rules, concerning both terminology and syntax, explanations of the Thesaurus, criteria, choices made about the categories and the width of the semantic network, etc.; - a CD containing the Thesaurus. One side of great interest will be the c-learning process of the indexing language of the new Soggettario. This has to be undertaken only after the prototype stage is done. At that time, once the text of the Rules will have been published, it will be possible for the system to spread, to be learned, and to be tested by various indexers and partners.

Type

a

0.0016925298 = product of:
  0.0033850595 = sum of:
    0.0033850595 = product of:
      0.006770119 = sum of:
        0.006770119 = weight(_text_:a in 664) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006770119 = score(doc=664,freq=62.0), product of:
            0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041389145 = queryNorm
            0.14186095 = fieldWeight in 664, product of:
              7.8740077 = tf(freq=62.0), with freq of:
                62.0 = termFreq=62.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=664)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Rez. in: Knowledge organization 34(2007) no.1, S.58-60 (P. Buizza): "This Nuovo soggettario is the first sign of subject indexing renewal in Italy. Italian subject indexing has been based until now on Soggettario per i cataloghi delle biblioteche italiane (Firenze, 1956), a list of preferred terms and see references, with suitable hierarchical subdivisions and cross references, derived from the subject catalogue of the National Library in Florence (BNCF). New headings later used in Bibliografia nazionale italiana (BNI) were added without references, nor indeed with any real maintenance. Systematic instructions on how to combine the terms are lacking: the indexer using this instrument is obliged to infer the order of terms absent from the lists by consulting analogous entries. Italian libraries are suffering from the limits of this subject catalogue: vocabulary is inadequate, obsolete and inconsistent, the syndetic structure incomplete and inaccurate, and the syntax ill-defined, poorly explained and unable to reflect complex subjects. In the nineties, the Subject Indexing Research Group (Gruppo di ricerca sull'indicizzazione per soggetto, GRIS) of the AIB (Italian Library Association) developed the indexing theory and some principles of PRECIS and drew up guidelines based on consistent principles for vocabulary, semantic relationships and subject string construction, the latter according to role syntax (Guida 1997). In overhauling the Soggettario, the National Library in Florence aimed at a comprehensive indexing system. (A report on the method and evolution of the work has been published in Knowledge Organization (Lucarelli 2005), while the feasibility study is available in Italian (Per un nuovo Soggettario 2002). Any usable terms from the old Soggettario will be transferred to the new system, while taking into consideration international norms and interlinguistic compatibility, as well as applications outside the immediate library context. The terms will be accessible via a suitable OPAC operating on the most advanced software.
The guide Nuovo soggettario was presented on February 8' 2007 at a one-day seminar in the Palazzo Vecchio, Florence, in front of some 500 spellbound people. The Nuovo soggettario comes in two parts: the guide in book-form and an accompanying CD-ROM, by way of which a prototype of the thesaurus may be accessed on the Internet. In the former, rules are stated; the latter contains a pdf version of the guide and the first installment of the controlled vocabulary, which is to be further enriched and refined. Syntactic instructions (general application guidelines, as well as special annotations of particular terms) and the compiled subject strings file have yet to be added. The essentials of the new system are: 1) an analytic-synthetic approach, 2) use of terms (units of controlled vocabulary) and subject strings (which represent subjects by combining terms in linear order to form syntactic relationships), instead of main headings and subdivisions, 3) specificity of terms and strings, with a view to the co-extension of subject string and subject matter and 4) a clear distinction between semantic and syntactic relationships, with full control of them both. Basic features of the vocabulary include the uniformity and univocality of terms and thesaural management of a priori (semantic) relationships. Starting from its definition, each term can be categorially analyzed: four macro-categories are represented (agents, action, things, time), for which there are subcategories called facets (e.g., for actions: activities, disciplines, processes), which in turn have sub-facets. Morphological instructions conform to national and international standards, including BS 8723, ANSI/ NISO Z39.19 and the IFLA draft of Guidelines for multilingual thesauri, even for syntactic factorization. Different kinds of semantic relationships are represented thoroughly, and particular attention is paid to poly-hierarchies, which are used only in moderation: both top terms must actually be relevant. Node labels are used to specify the principle of division applied. Instance relationships are also used.
An entry is structured so as to present all the essential elements of the indexing system. For each term are given: category, facet, related terms, Dewey interdisciplinary class number and, if necessary; definition or scope notes. Sources used are referenced (an appendix in the book lists those used in the current work). Historical notes indicate whenever a change of term has occurred, thus smoothing the transition from the old lists. In chapter 5, the longest one, detailed instructions with practical examples show how to create entries and how to relate terms; upper relationships must always be complete, right up to the top term, whereas hierarchies of related terms not yet fully developed may remain unfinished. Subject string construction consists in a double operation: analysis and synthesis. The former is the analysis of logical functions performed by single concepts in the definition of the subject (e.g., transitive actions, object, agent, etc.) or in syntactic relationships (transitive relationships and belonging relationship), so that each term for those concepts is assigned its role (e.g., key concept, transitive element, agent, instrument, etc.) in the subject string, where the core is distinct from the complementary roles (e.g., place, time, form, etc.). Synthesis is based on a scheme of nuclear and complementary roles, and citation order follows agreed-upon principles of one-to-one relationships and logical dependence. There is no standard citation order based on facets, in a categorial logic, but a flexible one, although thorough. For example, it is possible for a time term (subdivision) to precede an action term, when the former is related to the latter as the object of action: "Arazzi - Sec. 16.-17. - Restauro" [Tapestry - 16th-17th century - Restoration] (p. 126). So, even with more complex subjects, it is possible to produce perfectly readable strings covering the whole of the subject matter without splitting it into two incomplete and complementary headings. To this end, some unusual connectives are adopted, giving the strings a more discursive style.
Thesaurus software is based on AgroVoc (http:// www.fao.org/aims/ag_intro.htm) provided by the FAO, but in modified form. Many searching options and contextualization within the full hierarchies are possible, so that the choice of morphology and syntax of terms and strings is made easier by the complete overview of semantic relationships. New controlled terms will be available soon, thanks to the work in progress - there are now 13,000 terms, of which 40 percent are non-preferred. In three months, free Internet access by CD-ROM will cease and a subscription will be needed. The digital version of old Soggettario and the corresponding unstructured lists of headings adopted in 1956-1985 are accessible together with the thesaurus, so that the whole vocabulary, old and new, will be at the fingertips of the indexer, who is forced to work with both tools during this transition period. In the future, it will be possible to integrate the thesaurus into library OPACs. The two parts form a very consistent and detailed resource. The guide is filled with examples; the accurate, clearly-expressed and consistent instructions are further enhanced by good use of fonts and type size, facilitating reading. The thesaurus is simple and quick to use, very rich, albeit only a prototype; see, for instance, a list of DDC numbers and related terms with their category and facet, and then entries, hierarchies and so on, and the capacity of the structure to show organized knowledge. The excellent outcome of a demanding experimentation, the intended guide welcomes in a new era of subject indexing in Italy and is highly recommended. The new method has been designed to be easily teachable to new and experimented indexers.
Now BNI is beginning to use the new language, pointing the way for the adoption of Nuovo soggettario in Italian libraries: a difficult challenge whose success is not assured. To name only one issue: including all fields of study requires particular care in treating terms with different specialized meanings; cooperation of other libraries and institutions is foreseen. At the same time, efforts are being made to assure the system's interoperability outside the library world. It is clear that a great commitment is required. "Too complex a system!" say the naysayers. "Only at the beginning," the proponents reply. The new system goes against the mainstream, compared with the imitation of the easy way offered by search engines - but we know that they must enrich their devices to improve quality, just repeating the work on semantic and syntactic relationships that leads formal expressions to the meanings they are intended to communicate - and also compared with research to create automated devices supporting human work, for the need to simplify cataloguing. Here AI is not involved, but automation is widely used to facilitate and to support the conscious work of indexers guided by rules as clear as possible. The advantage of Nuovo soggettario is its combination of a thesaurus (a much-appreciated tool used across the world) with the equally widespread technique of subject-string construction, which is to say: the rational and predictable combination of the terms used. The appearance of this original, unparalleled working model may well be a great occasion in the international development of indexing, as, on one hand, the Nuovo soggettario uses a recognized tool (the thesaurus) and, on the other, by permitting both pre-coordination and post-coordination, it attempts to overcome the fragmentation of increasingly complex and specialized subjects into isolated, single-term descriptors. This is a serious proposition that merits consideration from both theoretical and practical points of view - and outside Italy, too."

0.0015795645 = product of:
  0.003159129 = sum of:
    0.003159129 = product of:
      0.006318258 = sum of:
        0.006318258 = weight(_text_:a in 5611) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006318258 = score(doc=5611,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041389145 = queryNorm
            0.13239266 = fieldWeight in 5611, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5611)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The IFLA Section on Classification and Indexing's Working Group on Principles Underlying Subject Headings Languages has identified a set of eleven principles for subject heading languages and excerpted the texts that match each principle from the instructions for each of eleven national subject indexing systems, including excerpts from the LC's Subject Cataloging Manual: Subject Headings. This study compares the IFLA principles with other texts that express the principles underlying LCSH, especially Library of Congress Subject Headings: Principles of Structure and Policies for Application, prepared by Lois Mai Chan for the Library of Congress in 1990, Chan's later book on LCSH, and earlier documents by Haykin and Cutter. The principles are further elaborated for clarity and discussed

Type

a

0.0015795645 = product of:
  0.003159129 = sum of:
    0.003159129 = product of:
      0.006318258 = sum of:
        0.006318258 = weight(_text_:a in 5612) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006318258 = score(doc=5612,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041389145 = queryNorm
            0.13239266 = fieldWeight in 5612, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5612)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Library of Congress Subjecl Headings retrieved as the results of a search in an online catalog are likely to be filed in straight alphabetical, word-by-word order, ignoring the semantic structures of these headings and scattering headings of a similar type. This practice makes LC headings unnecessarily difficult to use and negates much of their indexing power. Enthusiasm for filing simplicity and postcoordinate indexing are likely contributing factors to this phenomenon. Since the report Headings for Tomorrow (1992) first raised this issue, filing practices favoring postcoordination over precoordination appear to have become more widespread and more entrenched

Type

a

0.0015795645 = product of:
  0.003159129 = sum of:
    0.003159129 = product of:
      0.006318258 = sum of:
        0.006318258 = weight(_text_:a in 5921) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006318258 = score(doc=5921,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041389145 = queryNorm
            0.13239266 = fieldWeight in 5921, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5921)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Surveys conducted during the last four years under the auspices of the International Federation of Library Associations and Organizations (IFLA) reveal that the Library of Congress Subject Headings is heavily used in national libraries outside of the United States, particularly in English-speaking countries. Many other countries report using a translation or adaptation of LCSH as their principal subject heading language. Magda Heiner-Freiling presents an analysis of the IFLA data, which also includes information on the classification schemes used by the libraries and whether or not the libraries have produced a manual on the creation and application of subject headings. The paper concludes with an Appendix showing the complete data from the 88 national libraries that respond to the surveys

Type

a

0.0015795645 = product of:
  0.003159129 = sum of:
    0.003159129 = product of:
      0.006318258 = sum of:
        0.006318258 = weight(_text_:a in 2180) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006318258 = score(doc=2180,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041389145 = queryNorm
            0.13239266 = fieldWeight in 2180, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2180)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Nuovo soggettario, edited by the National Central Library of Florence and published in 2007, is a subject indexing system renewing the existing »Soggettario per i cataloghi delle biblioteche italiane« (1956). The new language has been created according to rules and standards internationally recognized and is made up of various components, of which the multidisciplinary Thesaurus is the central one. This paper describes the facet analysis method adopted in developing the Thesaurus, (the terms of which derive mainly from the daily indexing work of the Italian National Bibliography) and how this has been applied to the semantic structure for legal terms. Details are also given concerning problems deriving from the overlapping of facets and how these are being resolved.

Type

a

0.0015795645 = product of:
  0.003159129 = sum of:
    0.003159129 = product of:
      0.006318258 = sum of:
        0.006318258 = weight(_text_:a in 2182) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006318258 = score(doc=2182,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041389145 = queryNorm
            0.13239266 = fieldWeight in 2182, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2182)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This article will look into subject indexing in Sweden today and give some ideas of the future. Our Swedish subject heading system is pre-coordinated and based on Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH). We think subject access is important but it is not always easy to apply correctly and we present some ideas on how to make it easier. We will first give a summary of the creation of the Swedish subject heading system and how it works today. We will also describe a new project, the TGM project, that was completed at the end of 2007. Another work that will be described is the indexing of fiction and children's literature.

Type

a

0.0015199365 = product of:
  0.003039873 = sum of:
    0.003039873 = product of:
      0.006079746 = sum of:
        0.006079746 = weight(_text_:a in 6135) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006079746 = score(doc=6135,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041389145 = queryNorm
            0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 6135, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=6135)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.0015199365 = product of:
  0.003039873 = sum of:
    0.003039873 = product of:
      0.006079746 = sum of:
        0.006079746 = weight(_text_:a in 1653) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006079746 = score(doc=1653,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041389145 = queryNorm
            0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 1653, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1653)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.0015199365 = product of:
  0.003039873 = sum of:
    0.003039873 = product of:
      0.006079746 = sum of:
        0.006079746 = weight(_text_:a in 1274) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006079746 = score(doc=1274,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041389145 = queryNorm
            0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 1274, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1274)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Over the last ten years, the Servizio Bibliotecario Nazionale (SBN) has become the largest Italian network of bibliographic services. The creation of the SBN Index database and its growth through shared cataloging were the focus of attention during the early phase, and for years, discussion was limited to questions of author cataloging and bibliographic description. Subject cataloging was excluded from the cooperative activity of the member libraries. In 1990 the Working Group on Subject Headings and Classes was established to examine this situation. First, a partial solution was found, to permit the launch of the network itself. This was followed, several years later, by the development of the SBN OPAC and the creation of the file of subject headings and classes in the SBN Index. From an operational perspective, the choice was made to forego managing the subject headings file in accordance with shared cataloging principles, with mixed results. In order for the subject file to have broader coverage and to further encourage cooperative subject cataloging, the SBN Index Development Program, in which the Istituto Centrale per il Catalogo Unico delle Biblioteche Italiane (ICCU) has been engaged for about two years, aims at enriching services of the database and opening up new and diversified types of usage. Almost simultaneously the Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale di Firenze (BNCF) initiated a feasibility study on the revision of the Soggettario delle biblioteche italiane (List of Subject Headings in Italian Libraries) for the catalogs of Italian libraries. Both the BNCF and the ICCU share the goal of building a new, consistent vocabulary for documentation of subject matter.

Type

a

0.0015199365 = product of:
  0.003039873 = sum of:
    0.003039873 = product of:
      0.006079746 = sum of:
        0.006079746 = weight(_text_:a in 3039) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.006079746 = score(doc=3039,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041389145 = queryNorm
            0.12739488 = fieldWeight in 3039, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3039)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Im Jahr 1898 begann die Library of Congress mit der Arbeit an einem Schlagwortkatalog - die Geburtsstunde der 'Library of Congress subject headings' (LCSH). Heute stellen die LCSH das zentrale Werkzeug zur verbalen inhaltlichen Erschließung in der gesamten angloamerikanischen Welt dar. Auch die Kritik an diesem Erschließungssystem hat eine lange Geschichte: Sie lässt sich bis in die Mitte des vergangenen Jahrhunderts zurückverfolgen und betraf im Lauf der Zeit recht unterschiedliche Aspekte. Neu an der Debatte der letzten Jahre ist, dass die Struktur der LCSH ganz grundsätzlich in Frage gestellt wird. Eine Projektgruppe der Bibliothek der University of California etwa urteilte 2005: "LCSH's complex syntax and rules for constructing headings restrict its application by requiring highly skilled personnel and limit the effectiveness of automated authority control." In einer für die Library of Congress erstellten Expertise mit dem Titel 'On the record' von 2008 heißt es: "LCSH suffers (...) from a structure that is cumbersome from both administrative and automation points of view". Es wird empfohlen, die LCSH in ein flexibleres Werkzeug zu verwandeln: "Transform LCSH into a tool that provides a more flexible means to create and modify subject authority data." Dies beinhaltet zum einen ein "de-coupling of subject strings", also eine 'Entkoppelung' der fest zusammengefügten (präkombinierten) Eintragungen, und zum anderen die Möglichkeit, das LCSH-Vokabular für "faceted browsing and discovery" nutzbar zu machen . Besonders drastische Worte wurden 2006 im sogenannten 'Calhoun Report' gefunden - einem Papier, das mit seinen radikalen Thesen in der amerikanischen Bibliothekswelt viel Aufsehen erregte: Man müsse die Library of Congress dazu bringen, die LCSH zu 'zerschlagen' ("urge LC to dismantle LCSH") - ja, sie gar zu 'eliminieren' ("eliminate LCSH").

Type

a

0.0015046606 = product of:
  0.0030093212 = sum of:
    0.0030093212 = product of:
      0.0060186423 = sum of:
        0.0060186423 = weight(_text_:a in 2232) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0060186423 = score(doc=2232,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041389145 = queryNorm
            0.12611452 = fieldWeight in 2232, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2232)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

We developed a project utilizing the local form/genre heading, "property data," and specific subheadings to help chemists, engineers, and those librarians assisting them to more easily locate library resources containing chemical and physical properties of substances. This article describes the project and examines possibilities for improving access to physical sciences literature in relation to Library of Congress Subject Headings and ongoing developments in authority records for form/genre terms. It also introduces functionality of such headings in the new "next generation" catalogs.

Type

a

0.0013594727 = product of:
  0.0027189455 = sum of:
    0.0027189455 = product of:
      0.005437891 = sum of:
        0.005437891 = weight(_text_:a in 1224) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.005437891 = score(doc=1224,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041389145 = queryNorm
            0.11394546 = fieldWeight in 1224, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1224)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Enthält die Beiträge: BACKGROUND: Alva T STONE: The LCSH Century: A Brief History of the Library of Congress Subject Headings, and Introduction to the Centennial Essays - THEORY AND PRINCIPLES: Elaine SVENONIUS: LCSH: Semantics, Syntax and Specificity; Heidi Lee HOERMAN u. Kevin A. FURNISS: Turning Practice into Principles: A Comparison of the IFLA: Principles Underlying Subject Heading Languages (SHLs) and the Principles Underlying the Library of Congress Subject Headings System; Hope A. OLSON: Difference, Culture and Change:The Untapped Potential of LCSH - ONLINE ENVIRONMENT: Pauline Atherton COCHRANE: Improving LCSH for Use in Online Catalogs Revisited-What Progress Has Been Made? What Issues Still Remain?; Gregory WOOL: Filing and Precoordination: How Subject Headings Are Displayed in Online Catalogs and Why It Matters; Stephen HEARN: Machine-Assisted Validation of LC Subject Headings: Implications for Authority File Structure - SPECIFIC PERSPECTIVES: Thomas MANN: Teaching Library of Congress Subject Headings; Louisa J. KREIDER: LCSH Works! Subject Searching Effectiveness at the Cleveland Public Library and the Growth of Library of Congress Subject Headings Through Cooperation; Harriette HEMMASI u J. Bradford YOUNG: LCSH for Music: Historical and Empirical Perspectives; Joseph MILLER u. Patricia KUHR: LCSH and Periodical Indexing: Adoption vs. Adaptation; David P MILLER: Out from Under: Form/Genre Access in LCSH - WORLD VIEW: Magda HEINER-FREILING: Survey on Subject Heading Languages Used in National Libraries and Bibliographies; Andrew MacEWAN: Crossing Language Barriers in Europe: Linking LCSH to Other Subject Heading Languages; Alvaro QUIJANO-SOLIS u.a.: Automated Authority Files of Spanish-Language Subject Headings - FUTURE PROSPECTS: Lois Mai CHAN u. Theodora HODGES: Entering the Millennium: a new century for LCSH

0.0013594727 = product of:
  0.0027189455 = sum of:
    0.0027189455 = product of:
      0.005437891 = sum of:
        0.005437891 = weight(_text_:a in 5366) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.005437891 = score(doc=5366,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.04772363 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041389145 = queryNorm
            0.11394546 = fieldWeight in 5366, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5366)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Enthält die Beiträge: BACKGROUND: Alva T STONE: The LCSH Century: A Brief History of the Library of Congress Subject Headings, and Introduction to the Centennial Essays - THEORY AND PRINCIPLES: Elaine SVENONIUS: LCSH: Semantics, Syntax and Specificity; Heidi Lee HOERMAN u. Kevin A. FURNISS: Turning Practice into Principles: A Comparison of the IFLA: Principles Underlying Subject Heading Languages (SHLs) and the Principles Underlying the Library of Congress Subject Headings System; Hope A. OLSON: Difference, Culture and Change:The Untapped Potential of LCSH - ONLINE ENVIRONMENT: Pauline Atherton COCHRANE: Improving LCSH for Use in Online Catalogs Revisited-What Progress Has Been Made? What Issues Still Remain?; Gregory WOOL: Filing and Precoordination: How Subject Headings Are Displayed in Online Catalogs and Why It Matters; Stephen HEARN: Machine-Assisted Validation of LC Subject Headings: Implications for Authority File Structure - SPECIFIC PERSPECTIVES: Thomas MANN: Teaching Library of Congress Subject Headings; Louisa J. KREIDER: LCSH Works! Subject Searching Effectiveness at the Cleveland Public Library and the Growth of Library of Congress Subject Headings Through Cooperation; Harriette HEMMASI u J. Bradford YOUNG: LCSH for Music: Historical and Empirical Perspectives; Joseph MILLER u. Patricia KUHR: LCSH and Periodical Indexing: Adoption vs. Adaptation; David P MILLER: Out from Under: Form/Genre Access in LCSH - WORLD VIEW: Magda HEINER-FREILING: Survey on Subject Heading Languages Used in National Libraries and Bibliographies; Andrew MacEWAN: Crossing Language Barriers in Europe: Linking LCSH to Other Subject Heading Languages; Alvaro QUIJANO-SOLIS u.a.: Automated Authority Files of Spanish-Language Subject Headings - FUTURE PROSPECTS: Lois Mai CHAN u. Theodora HODGES: Entering the Millennium: a new century for LCSH