Search (6 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Carlyle, A."
  • × theme_ss:"Formalerschließung"
  1. Carlyle, A.: Understanding FRBR as a conceptual model : FRBR and the bibliographic universe (2006) 0.02
    0.024089992 = product of:
      0.048179984 = sum of:
        0.048179984 = sum of:
          0.010739701 = weight(_text_:a in 1050) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.010739701 = score(doc=1050,freq=14.0), product of:
              0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = queryNorm
              0.20223314 = fieldWeight in 1050, product of:
                3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                  14.0 = termFreq=14.0
                1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1050)
          0.037440285 = weight(_text_:22 in 1050) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.037440285 = score(doc=1050,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.046056706 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1050, 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=1050)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) presents a complex conceptual model. Because of this, it is not easy for everyone to understand. The purpose of this paper is to make some of the more difficult aspects of the FRBR model, in particular the Croup 1 entities work, expression, manifestation, and item, easier to understand by placing FRBR in the context of what it is: a conceptual entity-relationship model. To this end, a definition of the term "model" is presented, a variety of types and junctions of models are introduced, conceptual models are discussed in detail, modeling an abstraction is explained, and different ways of interpreting FRBR are suggested. Various models used in the history of cataloging are introduced to place FRBR in the context of the historical development of document models.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Type
    a
  2. Carlyle, A.: Developing organized information displays for voluminous worls : a study of user clustering behavior (2001) 0.00
    0.004101291 = product of:
      0.008202582 = sum of:
        0.008202582 = product of:
          0.016405163 = sum of:
            0.016405163 = weight(_text_:a in 819) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.016405163 = score(doc=819,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.3089162 = fieldWeight in 819, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=819)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Type
    a
  3. Carlyle, A.; Ranger, S.; Summerlin, J.: Making the pieces fit : little women, works, and the pursuit of quality (2008) 0.00
    0.0031324127 = product of:
      0.0062648254 = sum of:
        0.0062648254 = product of:
          0.012529651 = sum of:
            0.012529651 = weight(_text_:a in 799) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.012529651 = score(doc=799,freq=14.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.23593865 = fieldWeight in 799, product of:
                  3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                    14.0 = termFreq=14.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=799)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    In current cataloging practice, the identification of an item as a member of a particular work set is accomplished by assigning a main entry heading, or main entry citation, in the bibliographic record representing that item. The main entry citation is normally comprised of a primary author name and the uniform title associated with the work. However, the quality of bibliographic records varies, and this means of identification is not universally used by catalogers. Thus, consistent identification and retrieval of records representing editions of works is not guaranteed. Research is reported that investigates the extent to which records that are members of a particular work set may be automatically identified as such.
    Type
    a
  4. Efthimiadis, E.N.; Carlyle, A.: Organizing Internet resources : metadata and the Web (1997) 0.00
    0.00270615 = product of:
      0.0054123 = sum of:
        0.0054123 = product of:
          0.0108246 = sum of:
            0.0108246 = weight(_text_:a in 2561) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0108246 = score(doc=2561,freq=8.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.20383182 = fieldWeight in 2561, product of:
                  2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                    8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2561)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Introduces a special section on organizing Internet resources. Approaches based on fulltext indexing of the content of Internet sites are not an adequate solution for providing access to Internet resources. Adding metadata can provide an overview of a subject area and improve the user's ability to discriminate among similar sources. Introduces the articles in this section that explore issues associated with the provision of metadata
    Type
    a
  5. Carlyle, A.; Fusco, L.M.: Equivalence in Tillett's bibliographic relationships taxonomy : a revision (2003) 0.00
    0.0024857575 = product of:
      0.004971515 = sum of:
        0.004971515 = product of:
          0.00994303 = sum of:
            0.00994303 = weight(_text_:a in 2719) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.00994303 = score(doc=2719,freq=12.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.18723148 = fieldWeight in 2719, product of:
                  3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                    12.0 = termFreq=12.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2719)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    This paper analyzes the equivalence relationship as presented by Barbara B. Tillett in her taxonomy of bibliographic relationships. Tillett's definition of equivalence comprised of two parts, first, that equivalence holds between exacts copies of bibliographic items or documents, and second, that it may hold between an original item and a reproduction, if the intellectual content and authorship are presented. It is proposed that this definition is too restrictive, excluding relationships among items that may, based an contexts of use, act as equivalent. Further, it is suggested that a taxonomy of bibliographic relationships be constructed as holding between document representations as opposed to documents themselves. A revised definition of equivalence is offered in which equivalence relationships may hold among document representations in which one or more document properties described in the representations are shared. One advantage of this revision is that it subsumes Tillett's shared characteristic relationship, simplifying the taxonomy.
    Type
    a
  6. Carlyle, A.: Fulfilling the second objective in the online catalog : schemes for organizing author and work records into usable displays (1997) 0.00
    0.0022374375 = product of:
      0.004474875 = sum of:
        0.004474875 = product of:
          0.00894975 = sum of:
            0.00894975 = weight(_text_:a in 908) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.00894975 = score(doc=908,freq=14.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.1685276 = fieldWeight in 908, product of:
                  3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                    14.0 = termFreq=14.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=908)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    The 2nd objective of the catalogue, adopted internationally in the Paris Principles, requires that cataloguing records for particular authors and particular works be easily identified (IFLA 1991). Analysis of the requirements of the 2nd objective of the catalogue shows that it has 2 components: a retrieval component; and a display component; and that it may be interpreted broadly to include related works and works about a work or author. Investigates 2 schemes for their contributions to the creation of online catalogue displays that meet 2nd objective requirements. Analyzes the catalogue filing rule scheme to show that author and work displays in card catalogues have been composed of many groups or classes of materials that may also be used to create organized displays in online catalogues. The groups used in the filing rule scheme are based on relationships among items. Proposes a scheme based on Tillet's bibliographic relationship taxonomy to discover additional types of relationships that may be used to group record in online catalogue displays leading to a new scheme for the creation of organized display in online catalogues. Incorporates elements from both the filing rule scheme and the bibliographic relationship taxonomy to create displays that meet the requirements of the 2nd objective more fully than either scheme does alone
    Type
    a