Search (3 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × type_ss:"el"
  • × theme_ss:"Geschichte der Kataloge"
  1. Laaff, M.: Googles genialer Urahn (2011) 0.00
    0.00390003 = product of:
      0.00780006 = sum of:
        0.00780006 = product of:
          0.01560012 = sum of:
            0.01560012 = weight(_text_:22 in 4610) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.01560012 = score(doc=4610,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.09672529 = fieldWeight in 4610, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=4610)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Date
    24.10.2008 14:19:22
  2. Dousa, T.M.: E. Wyndham Hulme's classification of the attributes of books : On an early model of a core bibliographical entity (2017) 0.00
    0.0015127839 = product of:
      0.0030255679 = sum of:
        0.0030255679 = product of:
          0.0060511357 = sum of:
            0.0060511357 = weight(_text_:a in 3859) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0060511357 = score(doc=3859,freq=10.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.11394546 = fieldWeight in 3859, 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=3859)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Modelling bibliographical entities is a prominent activity within knowledge organization today. Current models of bibliographic entities, such as Functional Requirements for Bibliographical Records (FRBR) and the Bibliographic Framework (BIBFRAME), take inspiration from data - modelling methods developed by computer scientists from the mid - 1970s on. Thus, it would seem that the modelling of bibliographic entities is an activity of very recent vintage. However, it is possible to find examples of bibliographical models from earlier periods of knowledge organization. The purpose of this paper is to draw attention to one such model, outlined by the early 20th - century British classification theorist E. Wyndham Hulme in his essay on "Principles of Book Classification" (1911 - 1912). There, Hulme set forth a classification of various attributes by which books can conceivably be classified. These he first divided into accidental and inseparable attributes. Accidental attributes were subdivided into edition - level and copy - level attributes and inseparable attitudes, into physical and non - physical attributes. Comparison of Hulme's classification of attributes with those of FRBR and BIBFRAME 2.0 reveals that the different classes of attributes in Hulme's classification correspond to groups of attributes associated with different bibliographical entities in those models. These later models assume the existence of different bibliographic entities in an abstraction hierarchy among which attributes are distributed, whereas Hulme posited only a single entity - the book - , whose various aspects he clustered into different classes of attributes. Thus, Hulme's model offers an interesting alternative to current assumptions about how to conceptualize the relationship between attributes and entities in the bibliographical universe.
    Type
    a
  3. Genetasio, G.: ¬The International Cataloguing Principles and their future", in: JLIS.it 3/1 (2012) (2012) 0.00
    0.0014351527 = product of:
      0.0028703054 = sum of:
        0.0028703054 = product of:
          0.005740611 = sum of:
            0.005740611 = weight(_text_:a in 2625) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.005740611 = score(doc=2625,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046056706 = queryNorm
                0.10809815 = fieldWeight in 2625, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2625)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    The article aims to provide an update on the 2009 Statement of International Cataloguing Principles (ICP) and on the status of work on the Statement by the IFLA Cataloguing Section. The article begins with a summary of the drafting process of the ICP by the IME ICC, International Meeting of Experts on an International Cataloguing Code, focusing in particular on the first meeting (IME ICC1) and on the earlier drafts of the 2009 Statement. It then analyzes both the major innovations and the unsatisfactory aspects of the ICP. Finally, it explains and comments on the recent documents by the IFLA Cataloguing Section relating to the ICP, which express their intention to revise the Statement and to verify the convenience of drawing up an international cataloguing code. The latter intention is considered in detail and criticized by the author in the light of the recent publication of the RDA, Resource Description and Access. The article is complemented by an updated bibliography on the ICP.
    Type
    a

Languages