Search (2 results, page 1 of 1)

0.0026922924 = product of:
  0.005384585 = sum of:
    0.005384585 = product of:
      0.016153755 = sum of:
        0.016153755 = weight(_text_:l in 13) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016153755 = score(doc=13,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1471395 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037019465 = queryNorm
            0.1097853 = fieldWeight in 13, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9746525 = idf(docFreq=2257, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=13)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Rez. in: JASIST. 54(2003) no.9, S.908-909 (L. Ennis): "This is a timely and important addition to the growing body of work an libraries and digital collections. Both Deegan and Tanner bring a wide array of experience and knowledge to the work creating a valuable resource for librarians and digital collection managers. The book is the first in what the authors hope will become a series of volumes covering various issues of digital futures. Digital Futures: Strategies for the Information Age contains nine main chapters divided into sections, an introduction, a conclusion, a bibliography, a glossary, and an index. Each chapter begins with a quote or two and an introduction to help set the stage for the rest of the chapter. The first chapter, "Digital Futures in Current Context," outlines the myriad of changes in information technology from the past 50 years and the impact of those changes an libraries, library practices, and publishing. The book is written for people with little or no prior knowledge of information technology, so technologically savvy readers may find the first chapter a little elementary. For instance, the chapter includes a good bit of the history and workings of the Internet and World Wide Web. However, without the chapter included in the text, the work world lack a real starting point for the narrative and possibly alienate readers just starting their voyage into information science. The second chapter, "Why Digitize?" discusses why libraries and librarians should consider digital projects as a means of providing access. While the concentration is an the benefits of digital projects, the authors are also careful to point out various pitfalls and stumbling blocks to creating, managing, and preserving a digital collection. To help demonstrate their point, the authors include examples of a number of active projects covering newspapers, photo collections, books, and periodicals, and provide URLs so readers can visit the projects an their own. This chapter gives the reader a good overview of the various issues surrounding digitization as well as practical examples. While the first two chapters are a good introduction to the subject and examine theoretical issues, the next two chapters begin take an more practical issues. In Chapter Three, "Developing Collections in the Digital World," and four, "The Economic Factors," the authors explore how digital collections work with traditional library collecfions and how collection development for digital resources differs from collection development of non-digital resources. One of the most interesting topics of these chapters covers the issues surrounding serials using JSTOR and Project MUSE as examples. E-books and their impact an libraries is also discussed. The remaining chapters are by far the most timely and important parts of the work. Chapter Five, "Resource Discovery, Description and Use," examines the growing area of metadata and its importance for libraries and librarians. The chapter begins with a look at how the World Wide Web works and the problems with search engines and then evolves into a discussion of what metadata is, the types of metadata, and metadata creation. The authors explain that one of the biggest problems with the World Wide Web is that the construction and description of web pages is imprecise. The solution for bettering retrieval is metadata.

0.0022941264 = product of:
  0.004588253 = sum of:
    0.004588253 = product of:
      0.013764758 = sum of:
        0.013764758 = weight(_text_:c in 1973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013764758 = score(doc=1973,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.12769513 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037019465 = queryNorm
            0.10779391 = fieldWeight in 1973, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.4494052 = idf(docFreq=3817, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=1973)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Introduction: Libraries and Their Interrelationships with Google - William Miller Disruptive Beneficence: The Google Print Program and the Future of Libraries - Mark Sandler The Google Library Project at Oxford - Ronald Milne The (Uncertain) Future of Libraries in a Google World: Sounding an Alarm - Rick Anderson A Gaggle of Googles: Limitations and Defects of Electronic Access as Panacea - -Mark Y. Herring Using the Google Search Appliance for Federated Searching: A Case Study - Mary Taylor Google's Print and Scholar Initiatives: The Value of and Impact on Libraries and Information Services - Robert J. Lackie Google Scholar vs. Library Scholar: Testing the Performance of Schoogle - Burton Callicott; Debbie Vaughn Google, the Invisible Web, and Librarians: Slaying the Research Goliath - Francine Egger-Sider; Jane Devine Choices in the Paradigm Shift: Where Next for Libraries? - Shelley E. Phipps; Krisellen Maloney Calling the Scholars Home: Google Scholar as a Tool for Rediscovering the Academic Library - Maurice C. York Checking Under the Hood: Evaluating Google Scholar for Reference Use - Janice Adlington; Chris Benda Running with the Devil: Accessing Library-Licensed Full Text Holdings Through Google Scholar - Rebecca Donlan; Rachel Cooke Directing Students to New Information Types: A New Role for Google in Literature Searches? - Mike Thelwall Evaluating Google Scholar as a Tool for Information Literacy Rachael Cathcart - Amanda Roberts Optimising Publications for Google Users - Alan Dawson Google and Privacy - Paul S. Piper Image: Google's Most Important Product - Ron Force Keeping Up with Google: Resources and Strategies for Staying Ahead of the Pack - Michael J. Krasulski; Steven J. Bell

Footnote

Ebenfalls direkt aus der Praxis erhält der Leser Informationen zum Google-PrintProgramm. Robert Milne beschreibt die Zusammenarbeit von Google und der Universität Oxford. In diesem Aufsatz wird - was dem Autor natürlich nicht anzulasten ist - ein Problem des vorliegenden Werks deutlich: Viele Informationen sind doch von sehr beschränkter Haltbarkeit. Der Redaktionsschluss war im Frühsommer 2005, sodass sich in vielen Bereichen bereits neue Entwicklungen ergeben haben. Dies ist beim Print-Programm der Fall, vor allem wird es aber bei dem Hauptthema des Bandes, nämlich Google Scholar, deutlich. Dieser Dienst wurde im November 2004 gestartet und stieß auf unterschiedlichste Reaktionen, die (anhand von Beispielen amerikanischer Bibliotheken) im Beitrag von Maurice C. York beschrieben werden. Einige Bibliotheken nahmen den Dienst begeistert auf und verlinkten diesen mit Lob versehen auf ihren Websites. Andere reagierten gegenteilig und warnten vor dessen schlechter Qualität. Auch weil vorauszusehen war, dass Google Scholar bei den Nutzern gut ankommen würde, darf das folgende Statement von einer Bibliothekswebsite geradezu als ignorant gelten: Google Scholar »is wonderful for those who do not have access to the library's databases« (S.119). Wie nun die Scholar-Nutzer auf die Bibliotheksangebote gelenkt werden können, beschreibt der ironisch »Running with the Devil« betitelte Aufsatz von Rebecca Donlan und Rachel Cooke. Die Autorinnen beschreiben den Einsatz von Link-Resolvern und gehen auf die in Google Scholar bestehenden Probleme durch unklare Bezeichnungen in den Trefferlisten ein. Einige Beispiele zeigen, dass Google Scholar auch in Kombination mit der Verlinkung auf die Bibliotheksbestände keine befriedigende Recherchesituation herstellt, sondern vielmehr weitere Anstrengungen nötig sind, um »das Beste beider Welten« zusammenzuführen. Zwei weitere Aufsätze beschäftigen sich mit der Frage, wie gut Google Scholar eigentlich ist. Einmal geht es darum, wie gut Scholar den »ACRL Information Literacy Standards« genügt. Der zweite Beitrag vergleicht Google Scholar anhand von fünf Suchaufgaben einerseits mit einem lokalen Bibliothekskatalog, andererseits mit EBSCOs Academic Search Premier und jeweils einer fachspezifischen Datenbank. Die Ergebnisse zeigen keine durchgehende Überlegenheit einer Suchlösung, vielmehr wird deutlich, dass es auf die Auswahl des richtigen Suchwerkzeugs für die bestehende Suchanfrage ankommt bzw. dass erst eine Kombination dieser Werkzeuge zu optimalen Ergebnissen führt. Man könnte also auch hier wieder sagen: Google und Bibliotheken, nicht Google oder Bibliotheken.