-
Snow, M.: Visual depictions and the use of MARC : a view from the trenches of slide librarianship (1989)
0.11
0.10802135 = product of:
0.2160427 = sum of:
0.042349376 = weight(_text_:use in 2862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042349376 = score(doc=2862,freq=4.0), product of:
0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.33491597 = fieldWeight in 2862, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2862)
0.019129815 = weight(_text_:of in 2862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.019129815 = score(doc=2862,freq=12.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.29624295 = fieldWeight in 2862, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2862)
0.13498153 = sum of:
0.034545843 = weight(_text_:on in 2862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.034545843 = score(doc=2862,freq=10.0), product of:
0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.38036036 = fieldWeight in 2862, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2862)
0.10043568 = weight(_text_:line in 2862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.10043568 = score(doc=2862,freq=2.0), product of:
0.23157367 = queryWeight, product of:
5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.4337094 = fieldWeight in 2862, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2862)
0.019581974 = product of:
0.039163947 = sum of:
0.039163947 = weight(_text_:22 in 2862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.039163947 = score(doc=2862,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1446067 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2862, 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=2862)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(4/8)
- Abstract
- Paper presented at a symposium on 'Implementing the Art and Architecture Thesaurus (AAT): Controlled Vocabulary in the Extended MARC format', held at the 1989 Annual Conference of the Art Libraries Society of North America. The only way to get bibliographic records on to campus on-line library catalogues, and slide records on the national bibliographic utilities, is through the use of MARC. Discusses the importance of having individual slide and photograph records on the national bibliographic utilities, and considers the obstacles which currently make this difficult. Discusses mapping to MARC from data base management systems.
- Date
- 4.12.1995 22:51:36
-
Mueller, C.J.; Whittaker, M.A.: What is this thing called MARC(S)? (1990)
0.09
0.09155953 = product of:
0.24415874 = sum of:
0.033397563 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3588) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.033397563 = score(doc=3588,freq=2.0), product of:
0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.26736724 = fieldWeight in 3588, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3588)
0.017850775 = weight(_text_:of in 3588) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017850775 = score(doc=3588,freq=8.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.27643585 = fieldWeight in 3588, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3588)
0.1929104 = sum of:
0.030581824 = weight(_text_:on in 3588) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030581824 = score(doc=3588,freq=6.0), product of:
0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.33671528 = fieldWeight in 3588, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3588)
0.16232859 = weight(_text_:line in 3588) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.16232859 = score(doc=3588,freq=4.0), product of:
0.23157367 = queryWeight, product of:
5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.7009803 = fieldWeight in 3588, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
5.6078424 = idf(docFreq=440, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3588)
0.375 = coord(3/8)
- Abstract
- Contribution to an issue devoted to serials and reference services. Familiarity with the basic elements of the MARC format and their effect on the display and retrieval of bibliographic data is an essential element of public service in those libraries with MARC-based on-line catalogues. Describes the components of a MARC record. To successfully retrieve the information sought from an on-line catalogue, the catalogue user must know whether it is in an indexed field and, if so, must be familiar with the search strategies required by the system.
-
Mishra, K.S.: Bibliographic databases and exchange formats (1997)
0.06
0.064623356 = product of:
0.17232895 = sum of:
0.017850775 = weight(_text_:of in 1757) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017850775 = score(doc=1757,freq=8.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.27643585 = fieldWeight in 1757, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1757)
0.008828212 = product of:
0.017656423 = sum of:
0.017656423 = weight(_text_:on in 1757) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017656423 = score(doc=1757,freq=2.0), product of:
0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.19440265 = fieldWeight in 1757, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1757)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.14564995 = sum of:
0.10089115 = weight(_text_:computers in 1757) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.10089115 = score(doc=1757,freq=2.0), product of:
0.21710795 = queryWeight, product of:
5.257537 = idf(docFreq=625, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.464705 = fieldWeight in 1757, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.257537 = idf(docFreq=625, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1757)
0.0447588 = weight(_text_:22 in 1757) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0447588 = score(doc=1757,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1446067 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1757, 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=1757)
0.375 = coord(3/8)
- Abstract
- Computers play an important role in the development of bibliographic databases. Exchange formats are needed for the generation and exchange of bibliographic data at different levels: international, national, regional and local. Discusses the formats available at national and international level such as the International Standard Exchange Format (ISO 2709); the various MARC formats and the Common Communication Format (CCF). Work on Indian standards involving the Bureau of Indian Standards, the National Information System for Science and Technology (NISSAT) and other institutions proceeds only slowly
- Source
- DESIDOC bulletin of information technology. 17(1997) no.5, S.17-22
-
ISO 25964 Thesauri and interoperability with other vocabularies (2008)
0.05
0.054209933 = product of:
0.08673589 = sum of:
0.02800471 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1169) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02800471 = score(doc=1169,freq=10.0), product of:
0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.22419426 = fieldWeight in 1169, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1169)
0.012833798 = weight(_text_:use in 1169) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012833798 = score(doc=1169,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.101494856 = fieldWeight in 1169, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1169)
0.02035913 = weight(_text_:of in 1169) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02035913 = score(doc=1169,freq=74.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.31528005 = fieldWeight in 1169, product of:
8.602325 = tf(freq=74.0), with freq of:
74.0 = termFreq=74.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1169)
0.006621159 = product of:
0.013242318 = sum of:
0.013242318 = weight(_text_:on in 1169) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013242318 = score(doc=1169,freq=8.0), product of:
0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.14580199 = fieldWeight in 1169, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1169)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.018917091 = product of:
0.037834182 = sum of:
0.037834182 = weight(_text_:computers in 1169) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.037834182 = score(doc=1169,freq=2.0), product of:
0.21710795 = queryWeight, product of:
5.257537 = idf(docFreq=625, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.17426437 = fieldWeight in 1169, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.257537 = idf(docFreq=625, maxDocs=44218)
0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1169)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.625 = coord(5/8)
- Abstract
- T.1: Today's thesauri are mostly electronic tools, having moved on from the paper-based era when thesaurus standards were first developed. They are built and maintained with the support of software and need to integrate with other software, such as search engines and content management systems. Whereas in the past thesauri were designed for information professionals trained in indexing and searching, today there is a demand for vocabularies that untrained users will find to be intuitive. ISO 25964 makes the transition needed for the world of electronic information management. However, part 1 retains the assumption that human intellect is usually involved in the selection of indexing terms and in the selection of search terms. If both the indexer and the searcher are guided to choose the same term for the same concept, then relevant documents will be retrieved. This is the main principle underlying thesaurus design, even though a thesaurus built for human users may also be applied in situations where computers make the choices. Efficient exchange of data is a vital component of thesaurus management and exploitation. Hence the inclusion in this standard of recommendations for exchange formats and protocols. Adoption of these will facilitate interoperability between thesaurus management systems and the other computer applications, such as indexing and retrieval systems, that will utilize the data. Thesauri are typically used in post-coordinate retrieval systems, but may also be applied to hierarchical directories, pre-coordinate indexes and classification systems. Increasingly, thesaurus applications need to mesh with others, such as automatic categorization schemes, free-text search systems, etc. Part 2 of ISO 25964 describes additional types of structured vocabulary and gives recommendations to enable interoperation of the vocabularies at all stages of the information storage and retrieval process.
T.2: The ability to identify and locate relevant information among vast collections and other resources is a major and pressing challenge today. Several different types of vocabulary are in use for this purpose. Some of the most widely used vocabularies were designed a hundred years ago and have been evolving steadily. A different generation of vocabularies is now emerging, designed to exploit the electronic media more effectively. A good understanding of the previous generation is still essential for effective access to collections indexed with them. An important object of ISO 25964 as a whole is to support data exchange and other forms of interoperability in circumstances in which more than one structured vocabulary is applied within one retrieval system or network. Sometimes one vocabulary has to be mapped to another, and it is important to understand both the potential and the limitations of such mappings. In other systems, a thesaurus is mapped to a classification scheme, or an ontology to a thesaurus. Comprehensive interoperability needs to cover the whole range of vocabulary types, whether young or old. Concepts in different vocabularies are related only in that they have the same or similar meaning. However, the meaning can be found in a number of different aspects within each particular type of structured vocabulary: - within terms or captions selected in different languages; - in the notation assigned indicating a place within a larger hierarchy; - in the definition, scope notes, history notes and other notes that explain the significance of that concept; and - in explicit relationships to other concepts or entities within the same vocabulary. In order to create mappings from one structured vocabulary to another it is first necessary to understand, within the context of each different type of structured vocabulary, the significance and relative importance of each of the different elements in defining the meaning of that particular concept. ISO 25964-1 describes the key characteristics of thesauri along with additional advice on best practice. ISO 25964-2 focuses on other types of vocabulary and does not attempt to cover all aspects of good practice. It concentrates on those aspects which need to be understood if one of the vocabularies is to work effectively alongside one or more of the others. Recognizing that a new standard cannot be applied to some existing vocabularies, this part of ISO 25964 provides informative description alongside the recommendations, the aim of which is to enable users and system developers to interpret and implement the existing vocabularies effectively. The remainder of ISO 25964-2 deals with the principles and practicalities of establishing mappings between vocabularies.
- Issue
- Pt.1: Thesauri for information retrieval - Pt.2: Interoperability with other vocabularies.
-
Kokabi, M.: ¬The Iranian adaptation of UNIMARC (1997)
0.05
0.04653363 = product of:
0.12408967 = sum of:
0.048399284 = weight(_text_:use in 537) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.048399284 = score(doc=537,freq=4.0), product of:
0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.3827611 = fieldWeight in 537, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=537)
0.025244808 = weight(_text_:of in 537) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025244808 = score(doc=537,freq=16.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.39093933 = fieldWeight in 537, product of:
4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
16.0 = termFreq=16.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=537)
0.050445575 = product of:
0.10089115 = sum of:
0.10089115 = weight(_text_:computers in 537) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.10089115 = score(doc=537,freq=2.0), product of:
0.21710795 = queryWeight, product of:
5.257537 = idf(docFreq=625, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.464705 = fieldWeight in 537, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.257537 = idf(docFreq=625, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=537)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.375 = coord(3/8)
- Abstract
- Outline of a thesis produced at the University of New South Wales School of Information, Library and Archive Studies, the first serious study of MARC for Iran despite 12 years of the presence of computers in Iranian libraries. Considers the various MARC formats, reasons for choosing UNIMARC, and the use of the Farsi language in machines. Lists the modifications required to UNIMARC for use in the Iranian National Bibliography
-
Tennant, R.: ¬A bibliographic metadata infrastructure for the twenty-first century (2004)
0.05
0.046513073 = product of:
0.1860523 = sum of:
0.021862645 = weight(_text_:of in 2845) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021862645 = score(doc=2845,freq=12.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.33856338 = fieldWeight in 2845, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2845)
0.16418965 = sum of:
0.10089115 = weight(_text_:computers in 2845) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.10089115 = score(doc=2845,freq=2.0), product of:
0.21710795 = queryWeight, product of:
5.257537 = idf(docFreq=625, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.464705 = fieldWeight in 2845, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.257537 = idf(docFreq=625, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2845)
0.0632985 = weight(_text_:22 in 2845) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0632985 = score(doc=2845,freq=4.0), product of:
0.1446067 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.4377287 = fieldWeight in 2845, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2845)
0.25 = coord(2/8)
- Abstract
- The current library bibliographic infrastructure was constructed in the early days of computers - before the Web, XML, and a variety of other technological advances that now offer new opportunities. General requirements of a modern metadata infrastructure for libraries are identified, including such qualities as versatility, extensibility, granularity, and openness. A new kind of metadata infrastructure is then proposed that exhibits at least some of those qualities. Some key challenges that must be overcome to implement a change of this magnitude are identified.
- Date
- 9.12.2005 19:22:38
- Source
- Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2, S.175-181
-
Johnson, B.C.: XML and MARC : which is "right"? (2001)
0.05
0.045153156 = product of:
0.09030631 = sum of:
0.029222867 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5423) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.029222867 = score(doc=5423,freq=2.0), product of:
0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.23394634 = fieldWeight in 5423, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5423)
0.042349376 = weight(_text_:use in 5423) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042349376 = score(doc=5423,freq=4.0), product of:
0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.33491597 = fieldWeight in 5423, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5423)
0.0078097144 = weight(_text_:of in 5423) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0078097144 = score(doc=5423,freq=2.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.120940685 = fieldWeight in 5423, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5423)
0.010924355 = product of:
0.02184871 = sum of:
0.02184871 = weight(_text_:on in 5423) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02184871 = score(doc=5423,freq=4.0), product of:
0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.24056101 = fieldWeight in 5423, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5423)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(4/8)
- Abstract
- This article explores recent discussions about appropriate mark-up conventions for library information intended for use on the World Wide Web. In particular, the question of whether the MARC 21 format will continue to be useful and whether the time is right for a full-fledged conversion effort to XML is explored. The author concludes that the MARC format will be relevant well into the future, and its use will not hamper access to bibliographic information via the web. Early XML exploratory efforts carried out at the Stanford University's Lane Medical Library are reported on. Although these efforts are a promising start, much more consultation and investigation is needed to arrive at broadly acceptable standards for XML library information encoding and retrieval.
-
Giordano, R.: ¬The documentation of electronic texts : using Text Encoding Initiative headers: an introduction (1994)
0.04
0.043322913 = product of:
0.08664583 = sum of:
0.035423465 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 866) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035423465 = score(doc=866,freq=4.0), product of:
0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.2835858 = fieldWeight in 866, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=866)
0.025667597 = weight(_text_:use in 866) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025667597 = score(doc=866,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.20298971 = fieldWeight in 866, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=866)
0.018933605 = weight(_text_:of in 866) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.018933605 = score(doc=866,freq=16.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.2932045 = fieldWeight in 866, product of:
4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
16.0 = termFreq=16.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=866)
0.006621159 = product of:
0.013242318 = sum of:
0.013242318 = weight(_text_:on in 866) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013242318 = score(doc=866,freq=2.0), product of:
0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.14580199 = fieldWeight in 866, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=866)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(4/8)
- Abstract
- Presents a general introduction to the form and functions of the Text Encoding Initiative (TEI) headers and explains their relationship to the MARC record. The TEI header's main strength is that it documents electronic texts in a standard exchange format that should be understandable to both librarian cataloguers and text encoders outside of librarianship. TEI gives encoders the ability to document the the electronic text itself, its source, its encoding principles, and revisions, as well as non bibliographic characteristics of the text that can support both scholarly analysis and retrieval. Its bibliographic descriptions can be loaded into standard remote bibliographic databases, which should make electronic texts as easy to find for researchers as texts in other media. Presents a brief overview of the TEI header, the file description and ways in which the TEI headers have counterparts in MARC, the Encoding Description, the Profile Description, the Revision Description, the size and complexity of the TEI header, and the use of the TEI header to support document retrieval and analysis, with notes on some of the prospects and problems
-
Murphy, C.: Curriculum-enhanced MARC (CEMARC) : a new cataloging format for school librarians (1995)
0.04
0.04224656 = product of:
0.08449312 = sum of:
0.029945528 = weight(_text_:use in 5100) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.029945528 = score(doc=5100,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.23682132 = fieldWeight in 5100, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5100)
0.019129815 = weight(_text_:of in 5100) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.019129815 = score(doc=5100,freq=12.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.29624295 = fieldWeight in 5100, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5100)
0.007724685 = product of:
0.01544937 = sum of:
0.01544937 = weight(_text_:on in 5100) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01544937 = score(doc=5100,freq=2.0), product of:
0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.17010231 = fieldWeight in 5100, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5100)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.027693095 = product of:
0.05538619 = sum of:
0.05538619 = weight(_text_:22 in 5100) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05538619 = score(doc=5100,freq=4.0), product of:
0.1446067 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.38301262 = fieldWeight in 5100, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5100)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(4/8)
- Abstract
- Briefly summarizes the problems encountered when attempting to use the USMARC cataloguing format in US school libraries and describes the development of CEMARC format by the Northwest Ohio Educational Technology Foundation (NWOET), which addresses the main problems by: offering sata entry guidelines for a minimum USMARC standard in order to clarify inconsistencies in application; and by suggesting enhancements and new fields that go beyond the USMARC standard. Concludes with brief notes on early CEMARC implementation
- Date
- 11. 9.1996 19:22:20
- Imprint
- Kalamazoo, MI : International Association of School Librarianship
- Source
- Literacy: traditional, cultural, technological. Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Conference of the International Association of School Librarianship (selected papers), Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, Pittsburgh University, School of Library and Information Science, 17-22 Jul 94
-
Bales, K.: ¬The USMARC formats and visual materials (1989)
0.04
0.041227974 = product of:
0.08245595 = sum of:
0.033397563 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2861) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.033397563 = score(doc=2861,freq=2.0), product of:
0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.26736724 = fieldWeight in 2861, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2861)
0.017850775 = weight(_text_:of in 2861) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017850775 = score(doc=2861,freq=8.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.27643585 = fieldWeight in 2861, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2861)
0.008828212 = product of:
0.017656423 = sum of:
0.017656423 = weight(_text_:on in 2861) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017656423 = score(doc=2861,freq=2.0), product of:
0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.19440265 = fieldWeight in 2861, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2861)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.0223794 = product of:
0.0447588 = sum of:
0.0447588 = weight(_text_:22 in 2861) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0447588 = score(doc=2861,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1446067 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2861, 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=2861)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(4/8)
- Abstract
- Paper presented at a symposium on 'Implementing the Art and Architecture Thesaurus (AAT): Controlled Vocabulary in the Extended MARC format', held at the 1989 Annual Conference of the Art Libraries Society of North America. Describes how changes are effected in MARC and the role of the various groups in the library community that are involved in the implementing these changes. Discusses the expansion of the formats to accomodate cataloguing and retrieval for visual materials. Expanded capabilities for coding visual materials offer greater opportunity for user access.
- Date
- 4.12.1995 22:40:20
-
Salgáné, M.M.: Our electronic era and bibliographic informations computer-related bibliographic data formats, metadata formats and BDML (2005)
0.04
0.0394912 = product of:
0.0789824 = sum of:
0.01711173 = weight(_text_:use in 3005) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01711173 = score(doc=3005,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.13532647 = fieldWeight in 3005, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3005)
0.019957775 = weight(_text_:of in 3005) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.019957775 = score(doc=3005,freq=40.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.3090647 = fieldWeight in 3005, product of:
6.3245554 = tf(freq=40.0), with freq of:
40.0 = termFreq=40.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3005)
0.0062424885 = product of:
0.012484977 = sum of:
0.012484977 = weight(_text_:on in 3005) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012484977 = score(doc=3005,freq=4.0), product of:
0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.13746344 = fieldWeight in 3005, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3005)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.035670407 = product of:
0.071340814 = sum of:
0.071340814 = weight(_text_:computers in 3005) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.071340814 = score(doc=3005,freq=4.0), product of:
0.21710795 = queryWeight, product of:
5.257537 = idf(docFreq=625, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.32859606 = fieldWeight in 3005, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
5.257537 = idf(docFreq=625, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3005)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(4/8)
- 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.
- Source
- Librarianship in the information age: Proceedings of the 13th BOBCATSSS Symposium, 31 January - 2 February 2005 in Budapest, Hungary. Eds.: Marte Langeland u.a
-
Aalberg, T.; Haugen, F.B.; Husby, O.: ¬A Tool for Converting from MARC to FRBR (2006)
0.04
0.038035642 = product of:
0.076071285 = sum of:
0.029945528 = weight(_text_:use in 2425) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.029945528 = score(doc=2425,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.23682132 = fieldWeight in 2425, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2425)
0.015619429 = weight(_text_:of in 2425) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015619429 = score(doc=2425,freq=8.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.24188137 = fieldWeight in 2425, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2425)
0.010924355 = product of:
0.02184871 = sum of:
0.02184871 = weight(_text_:on in 2425) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02184871 = score(doc=2425,freq=4.0), product of:
0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.24056101 = fieldWeight in 2425, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2425)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.019581974 = product of:
0.039163947 = sum of:
0.039163947 = weight(_text_:22 in 2425) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.039163947 = score(doc=2425,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1446067 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2425, 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=2425)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(4/8)
- Abstract
- The FRBR model is by many considered to be an important contribution to the next generation of bibliographic catalogues, but a major challenge for the library community is how to use this model on already existing MARC-based bibliographic catalogues. This problem requires a solution for the interpretation and conversion of MARC records, and a tool for this kind of conversion is developed as a part of the Norwegian BIBSYS FRBR project. The tool is based on a systematic approach to the interpretation and conversion process and is designed to be adaptable to the rules applied in different catalogues.
- Source
- Research and advanced technology for digital libraries : 10th European conference, proceedings / ECDL 2006, Alicante, Spain, September 17 - 22, 2006
-
Avram, H.D.: Machine Readable Cataloging (MARC): 1961-1974 (2009)
0.04
0.037026566 = product of:
0.14810626 = sum of:
0.020662563 = weight(_text_:of in 3844) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020662563 = score(doc=3844,freq=14.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.31997898 = fieldWeight in 3844, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3844)
0.1274437 = sum of:
0.088279754 = weight(_text_:computers in 3844) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.088279754 = score(doc=3844,freq=2.0), product of:
0.21710795 = queryWeight, product of:
5.257537 = idf(docFreq=625, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.40661687 = fieldWeight in 3844, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.257537 = idf(docFreq=625, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3844)
0.039163947 = weight(_text_:22 in 3844) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.039163947 = score(doc=3844,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1446067 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3844, 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=3844)
0.25 = coord(2/8)
- Abstract
- The MARC Program of the Library of Congress, led during its formative years by the author of this entry, was a landmark in the history of automation. Technical procedures, standards, and formatting for the catalog record were experimented with and developed in modern form in this project. The project began when computers were mainframe, slow, and limited in storage. So little was known then about many aspects of automation of library information resources that the MARC project can be seen as a pioneering effort with immeasurable impact.
- Date
- 27. 8.2011 14:22:53
- Source
- Encyclopedia of library and information sciences. 3rd ed. Ed.: M.J. Bates
-
Keith, C.: Using XSLT to manipulate MARC metadata (2004)
0.03
0.034577712 = product of:
0.069155425 = sum of:
0.025667597 = weight(_text_:use in 4747) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025667597 = score(doc=4747,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.20298971 = fieldWeight in 4747, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4747)
0.02008212 = weight(_text_:of in 4747) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02008212 = score(doc=4747,freq=18.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.3109903 = fieldWeight in 4747, product of:
4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
18.0 = termFreq=18.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4747)
0.006621159 = product of:
0.013242318 = sum of:
0.013242318 = weight(_text_:on in 4747) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013242318 = score(doc=4747,freq=2.0), product of:
0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.14580199 = fieldWeight in 4747, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4747)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.016784549 = product of:
0.033569098 = sum of:
0.033569098 = weight(_text_:22 in 4747) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.033569098 = score(doc=4747,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1446067 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4747, 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=4747)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(4/8)
- Abstract
- This paper describes the MARCXML architecture implemented at the Library of Congress. It gives an overview of the component pieces of the architecture, including the MARCXML schema and the MARCXML toolkit, while giving a brief tutorial on their use. Several different applications of the architecture and tools are discussed to illustrate the features of the toolkit being developed thus far. Nearly any metadata format can take advantage of the features of the toolkit, and the process of the toolkit enabling a new format is discussed. Finally, this paper intends to foster new ideas with regards to the transformation of descriptive metadata, especially using XML tools. In this paper the following conventions will be used: MARC21 will refer to MARC 21 records in the ISO 2709 record structure used today; MARCXML will refer to MARC 21 records in an XML structure.
- Source
- Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2, S.122-130
-
Tosaka, Y.; Park, J.-r.: RDA: Resource description & access : a survey of the current state of the art (2013)
0.03
0.0338533 = product of:
0.0677066 = sum of:
0.020873476 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 677) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020873476 = score(doc=677,freq=2.0), product of:
0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 677, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=677)
0.021389665 = weight(_text_:use in 677) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021389665 = score(doc=677,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.1691581 = fieldWeight in 677, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=677)
0.017640345 = weight(_text_:of in 677) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017640345 = score(doc=677,freq=20.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.27317715 = fieldWeight in 677, product of:
4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
20.0 = termFreq=20.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=677)
0.007803111 = product of:
0.015606222 = sum of:
0.015606222 = weight(_text_:on in 677) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015606222 = score(doc=677,freq=4.0), product of:
0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.1718293 = fieldWeight in 677, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=677)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(4/8)
- Abstract
- Resource Description & Access (RDA) is intended to provide a flexible and extensible framework that can accommodate all types of content and media within rapidly evolving digital environments while also maintaining compatibility with the Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules, 2nd edition (AACR2). The cataloging community is grappling with practical issues in navigating the transition from AACR2 to RDA; there is a definite need to evaluate major subject areas and broader themes in information organization under the new RDA paradigm. This article aims to accomplish this task through a thorough and critical review of the emerging RDA literature published from 2005 to 2011. The review mostly concerns key areas of difference between RDA and AACR2, the relationship of the new cataloging code to metadata standards, the impact on encoding standards such as Machine-Readable Cataloging (MARC), end user considerations, and practitioners' views on RDA implementation and training. Future research will require more in-depth studies of RDA's expected benefits and the manner in which the new cataloging code will improve resource retrieval and bibliographic control for users and catalogers alike over AACR2. The question as to how the cataloging community can best move forward to the post-AACR2/MARC environment must be addressed carefully so as to chart the future of bibliographic control in the evolving environment of information production, management, and use.
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 64(2013) no.4, S.651-662
-
Weber, L.B.: Reading formatting MARC AMC (1990)
0.03
0.032339215 = product of:
0.08623791 = sum of:
0.048399284 = weight(_text_:use in 484) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.048399284 = score(doc=484,freq=4.0), product of:
0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.3827611 = fieldWeight in 484, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=484)
0.0154592255 = weight(_text_:of in 484) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0154592255 = score(doc=484,freq=6.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.23940048 = fieldWeight in 484, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=484)
0.0223794 = product of:
0.0447588 = sum of:
0.0447588 = weight(_text_:22 in 484) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0447588 = score(doc=484,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1446067 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 484, 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=484)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.375 = coord(3/8)
- Abstract
- This paper discusses how archivists use the MARC AMC format to exchange information about archival materials. The paper explains the modifications that MARC AMC introduced to the MARC bibliographic formats; gives examples of a record in generic USMARC AMC, RLIN AMC, and OCLC AMC; and considers the possible impact of format integration. The paper concludes with some thoughts about the changes that MARC AMC is causing in the archival profession.
- Date
- 8. 1.2007 14:22:51
- Footnote
- Simultaneously published as Describing Archival Materials: The Use of the MARC AMC Format
-
Guenther, R.S.: ¬The development and implementation of the USMARC format for classification data (1992)
0.03
0.03205192 = product of:
0.085471794 = sum of:
0.033397563 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 8865) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.033397563 = score(doc=8865,freq=2.0), product of:
0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.26736724 = fieldWeight in 8865, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=8865)
0.03422346 = weight(_text_:use in 8865) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03422346 = score(doc=8865,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.27065295 = fieldWeight in 8865, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=8865)
0.017850775 = weight(_text_:of in 8865) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017850775 = score(doc=8865,freq=8.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.27643585 = fieldWeight in 8865, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=8865)
0.375 = coord(3/8)
- Abstract
- This paper discusses the newly developed USMARC Format for Classification Data. It reviews its potential uses within an online system and its development as one of the USMARC standards. It provides a summary of the fields in the format and considers the prospects for its implementation. The papaer describes an experiment currently being conducted at the Library of Congress to create USMARC classification records and use a classification database in classifying materials in the social sciences
- Theme
- Klassifikationssysteme im Online-Retrieval
-
Mönch, C.; Aalberg, T.: Automatic conversion from MARC to FRBR (2003)
0.03
0.03170923 = product of:
0.06341846 = sum of:
0.030249555 = weight(_text_:use in 2422) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030249555 = score(doc=2422,freq=4.0), product of:
0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.23922569 = fieldWeight in 2422, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2422)
0.013664153 = weight(_text_:of in 2422) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013664153 = score(doc=2422,freq=12.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.21160212 = fieldWeight in 2422, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2422)
0.0055176322 = product of:
0.0110352645 = sum of:
0.0110352645 = weight(_text_:on in 2422) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0110352645 = score(doc=2422,freq=2.0), product of:
0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.121501654 = fieldWeight in 2422, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2422)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.013987125 = product of:
0.02797425 = sum of:
0.02797425 = weight(_text_:22 in 2422) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02797425 = score(doc=2422,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1446067 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2422, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2422)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(4/8)
- Abstract
- Catalogs have for centuries been the main tool that enabled users to search for items in a library by author, title, or subject. A catalog can be interpreted as a set of bibliographic records, where each record acts as a surrogate for a publication. Every record describes a specific publication and contains the data that is used to create the indexes of search systems and the information that is presented to the user. Bibliographic records are often captured and exchanged by the use of the MARC format. Although there are numerous rdquodialectsrdquo of the MARC format in use, they are usually crafted on the same basis and are interoperable with each other -to a certain extent. The data model of a MARC-based catalog, however, is rdquo[...] extremely non-normalized with excessive replication of datardquo [1]. For instance, a literary work that exists in numerous editions and translations is likely to yield a large result set because each edition or translation is represented by an individual record, that is unrelated to other records that describe the same work.
- Source
- Research and advanced technology for digital libraries : 7th European Conference, proceedings / ECDL 2003, Trondheim, Norway, August 17-22, 2003
-
Woods, E.W.; IFLA Section on classification and Indexing and Indexing and Information Technology; Joint Working Group on a Classification Format: Requirements for a format of classification data : Final report, July 1996 (1996)
0.03
0.03082946 = product of:
0.08221189 = sum of:
0.050096344 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3008) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.050096344 = score(doc=3008,freq=2.0), product of:
0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.40105087 = fieldWeight in 3008, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3008)
0.013388081 = weight(_text_:of in 3008) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013388081 = score(doc=3008,freq=2.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.20732689 = fieldWeight in 3008, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3008)
0.018727465 = product of:
0.03745493 = sum of:
0.03745493 = weight(_text_:on in 3008) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03745493 = score(doc=3008,freq=4.0), product of:
0.090823986 = queryWeight, product of:
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.4123903 = fieldWeight in 3008, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.199415 = idf(docFreq=13325, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3008)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.375 = coord(3/8)
- Theme
- Klassifikationssysteme im Online-Retrieval
-
Guenther, R.S.: Automating the Library of Congress Classification Scheme : implementation of the USMARC format for classification data (1996)
0.03
0.0304716 = product of:
0.081257604 = sum of:
0.029222867 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5578) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.029222867 = score(doc=5578,freq=2.0), product of:
0.124912694 = queryWeight, product of:
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.23394634 = fieldWeight in 5578, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5578)
0.029945528 = weight(_text_:use in 5578) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.029945528 = score(doc=5578,freq=2.0), product of:
0.12644777 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.23682132 = fieldWeight in 5578, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0620887 = idf(docFreq=5623, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5578)
0.022089208 = weight(_text_:of in 5578) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022089208 = score(doc=5578,freq=16.0), product of:
0.06457475 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.041294612 = queryNorm
0.34207192 = fieldWeight in 5578, product of:
4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
16.0 = termFreq=16.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5578)
0.375 = coord(3/8)
- Abstract
- Potential uses for classification data in machine readable form and reasons for the development of a standard, the USMARC Format for Classification Data, which allows for classification data to interact with other USMARC bibliographic and authority data are discussed. The development, structure, content, and use of the standard is reviewed with implementation decisions for the Library of Congress Classification scheme noted. The author examines the implementation of USMARC classification at LC, the conversion of the schedules, and the functionality of the software being used. Problems in the effort are explored, and enhancements desired for the online classification system are considered.
- Theme
- Klassifikationssysteme im Online-Retrieval
