Search (4 results, page 1 of 1)

0.032418273 = product of:
  0.1296731 = sum of:
    0.1296731 = weight(_text_:evolution in 4557) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.1296731 = score(doc=4557,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.66207874 = fieldWeight in 4557, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4557)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

RSWK

Evolution

Subject

Evolution

0.017192384 = product of:
  0.06876954 = sum of:
    0.06876954 = weight(_text_:evolution in 2626) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06876954 = score(doc=2626,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19585751 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.29663 = idf(docFreq=601, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03697776 = queryNorm
        0.35112026 = fieldWeight in 2626, 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=2626)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The growth of the rules which shape library catalogs and determine their character and usefulness is susceptible of much more extended treatment than is possible here. What is attempted in the following pages is to point out present trends and to indicate their significance. Evidently the year 1941 marked the beginning of a new phase in the evolution of cataloging rules. The publication then of the preliminary American second edition of the A.L.A. Catalog Rules appears as the culmination of a movement inspired exactly one hundred years earlier by the issue of Panizzi's rules. The latter followed a very long period in which rudimentary methods of cataloging slowly evolved and the need of rules to systematize the work gradually came to be recognized. As long as libraries were small and few books were published, the contents of a library could be recorded in any fashion that struck the fancy of the one in charge. Catalogs were made by librarians largely for their own use and had one simple function, that of an inventory or a collection of lists showing the holdings. The form and arrangement of the entries were arbitrary.

0.005009976 = product of:
  0.020039905 = sum of:
    0.020039905 = product of:
      0.060119715 = sum of:
        0.060119715 = weight(_text_:22 in 4857) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.060119715 = score(doc=4857,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12948982 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03697776 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 4857, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4857)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

8. 7.2000 18:17:22

0.005009976 = product of:
  0.020039905 = sum of:
    0.020039905 = product of:
      0.060119715 = sum of:
        0.060119715 = weight(_text_:22 in 5256) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.060119715 = score(doc=5256,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12948982 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03697776 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 5256, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=5256)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

3.10.2000 10:22:59