Search (68 results, page 1 of 4)

0.05252633 = product of:
  0.10505266 = sum of:
    0.09169272 = weight(_text_:evolution in 2830) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09169272 = score(doc=2830,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.46816036 = fieldWeight in 2830, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2830)
    0.013359937 = product of:
      0.04007981 = sum of:
        0.04007981 = weight(_text_:22 in 2830) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04007981 = score(doc=2830,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12948982 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03697776 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2830, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2830)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

This case study details the evolution of descriptive practices and standards used in the Mount Holyoke College Archives and the Five College Finding Aids Access Project, discusses the relationship of Encoded Archival Description (EAD) and the MARC standard in reference to archival description, and addresses the challenges and opportunities of transferring data from one metadata standard to another. The study demonstrates that greater standardization in archival description allows archivists to respond more effectively to technological change.

Source

Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1, S.18-27

0.045960538 = product of:
  0.091921076 = sum of:
    0.08023113 = weight(_text_:evolution in 7683) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08023113 = score(doc=7683,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.4096403 = fieldWeight in 7683, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7683)
    0.011689945 = product of:
      0.035069834 = sum of:
        0.035069834 = weight(_text_:22 in 7683) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035069834 = score(doc=7683,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12948982 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03697776 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 7683, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7683)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

The chief of cataloguing policy and support office at the LoC presents her views on the usefulness of conceptual modelling in determining future directions for cataloguing and the MARC format. After describing the evolution of bibliographic processes, suggests usign the entity-relationship conceptual model to step back from how we record information today and start thinking about what information really means and why we provide it. Argues that now is the time to reexamine the basic principles which underpin Anglo-American cataloguing codes and that MARC formats should be looked at to see how they can evolve towards a future, improved structure for communicating bibliographic and authority information

Source

OCLC newsletter. 1996, no.220, S.20-22

0.029778086 = product of:
  0.11911234 = sum of:
    0.11911234 = weight(_text_:evolution in 2535) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11911234 = score(doc=2535,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.6081582 = fieldWeight in 2535, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2535)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The work of Joint Steering Committee for the Revision of Anglo-American Cataloguing rules gave rise to a confernce in Toronto, Canada, in Oct 1997. some contributors elaborated on prepared texts about precise points concerning the evolution of rules in general, and those of the AACR in particular. The evolution of the notion of the catalogue and that of the practice of cataloguing were the focus of contributions and debates at an electronic forum set up specially for the occasion. Synthesizes the topics discussed including: hypertext navigation within the body of catalogues or documents, the creation of metadata included in the electronic documents themselves, the evolution of the notion of authority, and the advent of a set of universal characters permitting liberation from the problems of transliteration

0.028365988 = product of:
  0.11346395 = sum of:
    0.11346395 = weight(_text_:evolution in 920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11346395 = score(doc=920,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.5793189 = fieldWeight in 920, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=920)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Footnote

Übers. des Titels: Evolution of the UNIMARC format

0.02292318 = product of:
  0.09169272 = sum of:
    0.09169272 = weight(_text_:evolution in 3086) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09169272 = score(doc=3086,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.46816036 = fieldWeight in 3086, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3086)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.02292318 = product of:
  0.09169272 = sum of:
    0.09169272 = weight(_text_:evolution in 3813) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09169272 = score(doc=3813,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.46816036 = fieldWeight in 3813, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3813)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Surveys the evolution and development of MARC formats for the digital encoding of bibliographic data from their beginnings in 1968 at the Library of Congress to the present time, with particular emphasis on the development of 17 national formats. Examines the reasons for the divergence of MARC formats from each other as well as the early and recent trends in the development of national MARC formats

0.02292318 = product of:
  0.09169272 = sum of:
    0.09169272 = weight(_text_:evolution in 5754) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09169272 = score(doc=5754,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.46816036 = fieldWeight in 5754, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5754)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Offers the conceptual modelling technique as a means of analysing the future of library cataloguing with regard to cataloguing rules and MARC formats. Discusses the evolution of publishing technology and introduces the conceptual model that the IFLA is preparing in its study of the functional requirements of bibliographic records. Considers the purpose of cataloguing rules and how they have evolved in response to changes in technologies. Examines the future of cataloguing with future rules and alternative communication formats

0.02292318 = product of:
  0.09169272 = sum of:
    0.09169272 = weight(_text_:evolution in 6726) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09169272 = score(doc=6726,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.46816036 = fieldWeight in 6726, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6726)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Surveys the evolution and development of MARC formats for the digital encoding of bibliographic data from their beginnings in 1968 at the Library of Congress to the present time, with particular emphasis on the development of 17 national formats. Examines the reasons for the divergence of MARC formats from each other as well as the early and recent trends in the development of national MARC formats

0.020057783 = product of:
  0.08023113 = sum of:
    0.08023113 = weight(_text_:evolution in 3338) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08023113 = score(doc=3338,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.4096403 = fieldWeight in 3338, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3338)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Reports on work carried out as part of a feasibility study for UseMARCON (User Controlled Generic MARC Converter); a European Community funded project to develop a toolbox capable of converting bibliographic records from any MARC format into any other MARC format through a central conversion format. Reviews the use of MARC formats as internal or cataloguing formats or an exchange formats available in tape magnetic tape services. Special attention is paid to the actual us and use trends of UNIMARC, with particular reference to the role of UNIMARC as a new stage in the evolution of MARC formats, devised to improve and facilitate the exchange of bibliographic information between different systems

0.020057783 = product of:
  0.08023113 = sum of:
    0.08023113 = weight(_text_:evolution in 5409) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08023113 = score(doc=5409,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.4096403 = fieldWeight in 5409, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5409)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

With the introduction of the microcomputer in the 1980s, a revolution of sorts was initiated. In libraries this was evidenced by the acquisition of personal computers and the software to run on them. All that catalogers needed were cataloging rules and a MARC format to ensure their bibliographic control. However, little did catalogers realize they were dealing with an industry that introduced rapid technological changes, which effected continual revision of existing rules and the formulation of special guidelines to deal with the industry's innovative products. This article focuses on the attempts of libraries and organized cataloging groups to develop the Chapter 9 descriptive cataloging rules in AACR2; it highlights selected events and includes cataloging examples that illustrate the evolution of the chapter.

0.020057783 = product of:
  0.08023113 = sum of:
    0.08023113 = weight(_text_:evolution in 5574) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08023113 = score(doc=5574,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.4096403 = fieldWeight in 5574, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5574)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The use of computerized cataloguing data requires a commitment on the part of libraries to the standardization of data elements and record formats. Early computerized formats were initiated by several research libraries to serve the needs of particular university systems. In developing MARC, the LoC drew on the experiences of these libraries in establishing a standard acceptable to the research library community for the interchange of bibliographic data. Discusses early computerized formats influencing MARC, the origins of the MARC Pilot Project, and design factors influencing the evolution of the format through MARC2. Research was based on primary sources documenting the early history of MARC, including unpublished documents in the LoC archives

0.017192384 = product of:
  0.06876954 = sum of:
    0.06876954 = weight(_text_:evolution in 57) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06876954 = score(doc=57,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.35112026 = fieldWeight in 57, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=57)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Content

Enthält die Beiträge: McCALLUM, S.: What makes a standard?; HOLLEY, R.P.: IFLA and international standards in the area of bibliographical control; STERN, B.: Internationalizing the rules in AACR2: adopting and translating AACR2 for use in non-Anglo-American and non-English-speaking cataloging environments; GUILES, K., R. EWALD u. B. TILLETT: The evolution of LCRIs: from de facto standards to ?; SPICHER, K.M.: The development of the MARC format; THOMAS, S.E.: The core bibliographic record and the program for cooperative cataloging; PALOWITCH, C. u. L. HOROWITZ: Meta-information structures for networked information resources; KUHAGEN, J.A.: Standards for name and series authority records; WILLIAMSON, N.: Standards and rules for subject access; GUENTHER, R.S.: Automating the Library of Congress Classification Scheme: implementation of the USMARC Format for Classification Data; LEAZER, G.H.: Recent research on the sequential bibliographical relationship and its implications for standards and the library catalog: an examination of serials

0.017192384 = product of:
  0.06876954 = sum of:
    0.06876954 = weight(_text_:evolution in 4842) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06876954 = score(doc=4842,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.35112026 = fieldWeight in 4842, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4842)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.014326988 = product of:
  0.05730795 = sum of:
    0.05730795 = weight(_text_:evolution in 763) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05730795 = score(doc=763,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.2926002 = fieldWeight in 763, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=763)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Content

Vgl. Kommentar Eversberg: Wer dranbleiben will am Puls der Zeit und speziell an der sich dynamisierenden Evolution eines neuen Datenformatkonzepts, der sollte sich langsam beeilen, sich mit BIBFRAME vertraut zu machen: http://bibframe.org Diese Startseite organisiert nun den Zugang zu allem, was schon vorliegt und präsentabel ist, und das ist allerhand. Wer erst mal nur schnuppern will und schauen, wie denn BIBFRAME-Daten wohl aussehen, gehe zur "demonstration area", wo man u.a. auch aufbereitete Daten der DNB findet. Es gibt ferner Online Tools, und darunter einen "Transformation service", dem man eigenes MARC-XML übergeben kann, damit er was draus mache. [Exporte mit unserem MARCXML.APR klappen nicht unmittelbar, man muß zumindest die in der Datei schon vorhandenen zwei Kopfzeilen aktivieren und ans Ende noch </collection> setzen. Und hierarchische Daten machen noch Probleme, die wir uns vornehmen müssen.] Wer jetzt denkt, "Was geht uns das alles an?", der lese die letzte Zeile, die da lautet: "BIBFRAME.ORG is a collaborative effort of US Library of Congress, Zepheira and you!"

0.01146159 = product of:
  0.04584636 = sum of:
    0.04584636 = weight(_text_:evolution in 3005) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04584636 = score(doc=3005,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.23408018 = fieldWeight in 3005, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3005)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Using new communication technologies libraries must face continuously new questions, possibilities and expectations. This study discusses library-related aspects of our electronic era and how computer-related data formats affect bibliographic dataprocessing to give a summary of the most important results. First bibliographic formats for the exchange of bibliographic and related information in the machine-readable form between different types of computer systems were created more than 30 years ago. The evolution of information technologies leads to the improvement of computer systems. In addition to the development of computers and media types Internet has a great influence on data structure as well. Since the introduction of MARC bibliographic format, technology of data exchange between computers and between different computer systems has reached a very sophisticated stage and has contributed to the creation of new standards in this field. Today libraries work with this new infrastructure that induces many challenges. One of the most significant challenges is moving from a relatively homogenous bibliographic environment to a diverse one. Despite these challenges such changes are achievable and necessary to exploit possibilities of new metadata and technologies like the Internet and XML (Extensible Markup Language). XML is an open standard, a universal language for data on the Web. XML is nearly six-years-old standard designed for the description and computer-based management of (semi)-structured data and structured texts. XML gives developers the power to deliver structured data from a wide variety of applications and it is also an ideal format from server-to-server transfer of structured data. XML also isn't limited for Internet use and is an especially valuable tool in the field of library. In fact, XML's main strength - organizing information - makes it perfect for exchanging data between different systems. Tools that work with the XML can be used to process XML records without incurring additional costs associated with one's own software development. In addition, XML is also a suitable format for library web services. The Department of Computer-related Graphic Design and Library and Information Sciences of Debrecen University launched the BDML (Bibliographic Description Markup Language) development project in order to standardize bibliogrphic description with the help of XML.

0.007085177 = product of:
  0.028340708 = sum of:
    0.028340708 = product of:
      0.08502212 = sum of:
        0.08502212 = weight(_text_:22 in 5743) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08502212 = score(doc=5743,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.12948982 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03697776 = queryNorm
            0.6565931 = fieldWeight in 5743, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=5743)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

30. 3.2002 19:45:22

Source

Revista Española de Documentaçion Cientifica. 22(1999) no.2, S.198-219

0.0066799684 = product of:
  0.026719874 = sum of:
    0.026719874 = product of:
      0.08015962 = sum of:
        0.08015962 = weight(_text_:22 in 2840) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08015962 = score(doc=2840,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12948982 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03697776 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 2840, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=2840)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1

0.0058449726 = product of:
  0.02337989 = sum of:
    0.02337989 = product of:
      0.07013967 = sum of:
        0.07013967 = weight(_text_:22 in 7196) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07013967 = score(doc=7196,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12948982 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03697776 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 7196, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=7196)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1

0.0058449726 = product of:
  0.02337989 = sum of:
    0.02337989 = product of:
      0.07013967 = sum of:
        0.07013967 = weight(_text_:22 in 4973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07013967 = score(doc=4973,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12948982 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03697776 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 4973, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4973)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

26. 8.2000 19:22:35

0.0058449726 = product of:
  0.02337989 = sum of:
    0.02337989 = product of:
      0.07013967 = sum of:
        0.07013967 = weight(_text_:22 in 6838) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07013967 = score(doc=6838,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12948982 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03697776 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 6838, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6838)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Dialog mit Bibliotheken. 13(2001) H.3, S.20-22