Search (19 results, page 1 of 1)

0.0174208 = product of:
  0.0348416 = sum of:
    0.015624823 = weight(_text_:for in 1425) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015624823 = score(doc=1425,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08876751 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047278564 = queryNorm
        0.17601961 = fieldWeight in 1425, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1425)
    0.019216778 = product of:
      0.038433556 = sum of:
        0.038433556 = weight(_text_:22 in 1425) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038433556 = score(doc=1425,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16556148 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.047278564 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1425, 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=1425)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

This paper returns to Beghtol's (1986) insightful typology of warrant to consider an empirical example of a traditional top-down hierarchical classification system as it continues to evolve in the early 21st century. Our examination considers there may be multiple warrants identified among the processes of design and the relationships to users of the National Occupational Classification (NOC), the standard occupational classification system published in Canada. We argue that this shift in semantic warrant signals a transition for traditional knowledge organization systems, and that warrant continues to be a relevant analytical concept and organizing principle, both within and beyond the domain of bibliographic control.

Source

Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik

0.008525816 = product of:
  0.034103263 = sum of:
    0.034103263 = weight(_text_:for in 5369) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.034103263 = score(doc=5369,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.08876751 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047278564 = queryNorm
        0.3841863 = fieldWeight in 5369, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5369)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The Serials Cooperative Cataloging Program (SCCTP) is reviewed from the standpoint of a library educator. Although the demand for copy catalogers has declined in the era of digital information, the demand for original catalogers has remained constant due, in part, to the growth in titles in different media formats and different languages. Additionally linking to information housed externally or internally and embedding metadata tags for resource discovery are among the new tasks for organizers of information in the Internet era. Increasingly professional organizations are filling the need for continuing education and training for advanced-level catalogers. This article examines the SCCTP as a model for continuous professional development and concludes it is adaptable more generally.

0.0064449105 = product of:
  0.025779642 = sum of:
    0.025779642 = weight(_text_:for in 1419) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.025779642 = score(doc=1419,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.08876751 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047278564 = queryNorm
        0.29041752 = fieldWeight in 1419, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1419)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Reports a study of Canadian libraries to determine the extent of the application of codes and standards for bibliographic cataloguing records for facilitating the sharing of cataloguing records. The research examined results of a 1992 national survey of Canadian libraries to determine the pattern of use of AACR2R; cataloguing rules for different formats of library materials in various sizes and types of libraries. Analysis of data suggests that smaller libraries with collection sizes of less than 100.000 volumes were less likely than larger libraries to be record contributors. Those cataloguing agencies that were contributing to potentially derivable copy tended to use AACR2R in the majority of cases, perhaps suggesting that the quality of original records being created by self selected respondents to the survey were largely to current standard

0.0063788076 = product of:
  0.02551523 = sum of:
    0.02551523 = weight(_text_:for in 2106) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02551523 = score(doc=2106,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.08876751 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047278564 = queryNorm
        0.28743884 = fieldWeight in 2106, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2106)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Report of preliminary findings from an incremental national survey in prgress, beginning with public and academic libraries in Ontaria, Canada. Policies for the adoption of revisions to classification schedules and factors influencing decisions to reclassify existing materials in the collection were investigated

Source

Classification research for knowledge representation and organization. Proc. 5th Int. Study Conf. on Classification Research, Toronto, Canada, 24.-28.6.1991. Ed. by N.J. Williamson u. M. Hudon

0.0055814567 = product of:
  0.022325827 = sum of:
    0.022325827 = weight(_text_:for in 793) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022325827 = score(doc=793,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.08876751 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047278564 = queryNorm
        0.25150898 = fieldWeight in 793, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=793)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

While directions for the use of "germane terms for the physical medium of the work" appeared in the 1964 Rules for Descriptive Cataloging in the Library of Congress: Phonorecords, most libraries choosing to integrate nonbook materials in their collections, either colour-coded their catalogue cards, or added two-digit media codes to call numbers. The first formalized list of "general material designations" (gmds) - placed immediately following the title proper as an early warning device - was published in 1978 in the second edition of the Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules. Since their introduction they have been controversial as this investigation of the evolution of material designations explores.

0.0055242092 = product of:
  0.022096837 = sum of:
    0.022096837 = weight(_text_:for in 4595) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022096837 = score(doc=4595,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08876751 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047278564 = queryNorm
        0.24892932 = fieldWeight in 4595, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4595)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.0055242092 = product of:
  0.022096837 = sum of:
    0.022096837 = weight(_text_:for in 1747) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022096837 = score(doc=1747,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08876751 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047278564 = queryNorm
        0.24892932 = fieldWeight in 1747, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1747)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.0052082743 = product of:
  0.020833097 = sum of:
    0.020833097 = weight(_text_:for in 8171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020833097 = score(doc=8171,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08876751 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047278564 = queryNorm
        0.23469281 = fieldWeight in 8171, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=8171)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Reports the results of a national survey of Canadian libraries to determine the pattern of use of AACR2. 1988 revision (AACR2R), cataloguing rules for different formats of library materials in various sizes and types of libraries. Questionnaires were used to explore: the nature and frequency of use of the code; the preferred publication formats for acquiring AACR2R; and the contribution of records to a bibliographic utility or network (in house or external) database. Describes and summarizes the results, providing a baseline profile of AACR2R users and usage

0.00455724 = product of:
  0.01822896 = sum of:
    0.01822896 = weight(_text_:for in 776) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01822896 = score(doc=776,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08876751 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047278564 = queryNorm
        0.20535621 = fieldWeight in 776, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=776)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

In October 1997, the Joint Steering Committee for Revision of AACR (JSC) held the International Conference on the Principles and Future Development of AACR, in Toronto, Canada, to determine if a changing bibliographic landscape warranted fundamental rethinking of the Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules. This paper follows the thread of those changes as, between 1997 and early 2005, JSC pursued a vigorous schedule towards a third edition of AACR. Cataloguing constituency feedback on a first draft of AACR3 prompted a change in direction to a code with the working title, Resource Description and Access (RDA) - a content standard for multi-formats and communities.

0.00455724 = product of:
  0.01822896 = sum of:
    0.01822896 = weight(_text_:for in 1986) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01822896 = score(doc=1986,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08876751 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047278564 = queryNorm
        0.20535621 = fieldWeight in 1986, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1986)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This summary considers the final articles selected for the special issue, interweaving some common threads that bind them together in their consideration of the International Standard Bibliographic Description (ISBD), consolidated edition, 2011, as a bibliographic content standard. With discussions of (1) the historical and current evolution of the ISBD, (2) the concept of Universal Bibliographic Control relative to an emerging Semantic Web environment, (3) ISBD and national cataloging codes, and (4) the continuing challenges of "non-book" resources, as context, the article concludes by exploring the question, "Is there a future for the ISBD?"

0.003986755 = product of:
  0.01594702 = sum of:
    0.01594702 = weight(_text_:for in 114) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01594702 = score(doc=114,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.08876751 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047278564 = queryNorm
        0.17964928 = fieldWeight in 114, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=114)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

With the explosion of digitized resources accessible via networked information systems, and the corresponding proliferation of general purpose and domain-specific schemes, metadata have assumed a special prominence. While recent work emanating from the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) has focused on the Resource Description Framework (RDF) to support the interoperability of metadata standards - thus converting metatags from diverse domains from merely "machine-readable" to "machine-understandable" - the next iteration, to "human-understandable," remains a challenge. This apparent gap provides a framework for three-phase research (Howarth, 1999) to develop a tool which will provide a "human-understandable" front-end search assist to any XML-compliant metadata scheme. Findings from phase one, the analyses and mapping of seven metadata schemes, identify the particular challenges of designing a common "namespace", populated with element tags which are appropriately descriptive, yet readily understood by a lay searcher, when there is little congruence within, and a high degree of variability across, the metadata schemes under study. Implications for the subsequent design and testing of both the proposed "metalevel ontology" (phase two), and the prototype search assist tool (phase three) are examined

0.0039062058 = product of:
  0.015624823 = sum of:
    0.015624823 = weight(_text_:for in 2626) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015624823 = score(doc=2626,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08876751 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047278564 = queryNorm
        0.17601961 = fieldWeight in 2626, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2626)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Even as the number of Web-enabled resources and knowledge repositories continues its unabated climb, both general purpose and domain-specific metadata schemas are in vigorous development. While this might be viewed as a promising direction for more precise access to disparate metadata-enabled resources, semantically-oriented tools to facilitate cross-domain searching by end-users unfamiliar with structured approaches to language or particular metadata schema conventions have received little attention. This paper describes findings from a focus group assessment of a natural language "gateway" previously derived from mapping, then categorizing terminology from nine metadata schemas. Semantic ambiguities identified in relation to three core metadata elements, namely, "Names", "Title", and "Subject", are discussed relative to data collection techniques employed in the research. Implications for further research, and particularly that pertaining to the design of an Interlingua gateway to multilingual, metadata-enabled resources, are addressed.

0.0039062058 = product of:
  0.015624823 = sum of:
    0.015624823 = weight(_text_:for in 5526) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015624823 = score(doc=5526,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08876751 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047278564 = queryNorm
        0.17601961 = fieldWeight in 5526, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5526)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

With the proliferation of digitized resources accessible internationally via Internet and Intranet knowledge bases and a pressing need to develop more sophisticated tools for the identification and retrieval of electronic resources, both general purpose and domain-specific metadata schemes have assumed a particular prominence. This has resulted in a growing number of online repositories that must be accessed using terminology that would be considered unfamiliar to most searchers. Assuming that a natural language "gateway" requiring no prior knowledge of specific metadata tagging could facilitate cross-repository searching, end-users were engaged in focus group testing of a "namespace" of common categories derived from nine metadata schemes. Findings and their implications within an international context are presented.

0.0032224553 = product of:
  0.012889821 = sum of:
    0.012889821 = weight(_text_:for in 54) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012889821 = score(doc=54,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08876751 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047278564 = queryNorm
        0.14520876 = fieldWeight in 54, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=54)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Given the paucity of research addressing client preferences for metadata content and display in knowledge access systems, a three-year study involving a sample of Canadian public and academic libraries and their end-users, was undertaken. Gaps between user preferences and the availability and presentation of metadata elements in some current Canadian web-based knowledge access systems were identified. Ideal displays were subsequently prototyped and evaluated. Overall, end-users favoured systems containing brief, concise, and focused metadata elements, restricted to a one-screen, uncluttered display, and enhanced by a variety of hierarchical, associative, and equivalent relationship links.

0.0032224553 = product of:
  0.012889821 = sum of:
    0.012889821 = weight(_text_:for in 1903) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012889821 = score(doc=1903,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08876751 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047278564 = queryNorm
        0.14520876 = fieldWeight in 1903, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1903)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

In the ten years since the International Conference on the Principles and Future Development of AACR, long-standing debates have continued as to whether or not to have a "main entry", and whether or not to exercise the rule of three to limit the number of headings or access points in certain cases. Recent proposals from the Joint Steering Committee for Development of RDA have recommended a change in "main entry" terminology to "primary access point," and the elimination of the rule of three. This paper explores how and why these shifts have occurred.

0.0032224553 = product of:
  0.012889821 = sum of:
    0.012889821 = weight(_text_:for in 2723) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012889821 = score(doc=2723,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08876751 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047278564 = queryNorm
        0.14520876 = fieldWeight in 2723, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2723)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Even before John Fiske (1878) reminded catalogers of their "duty" to correctly identify authors with the same name, uniform headings had assumed a place and purpose in nineteenth-century catalogs. Rules for names of persons, families, corporate bodies, and places have been developed to ensure consistency of both structure and application. Catalogers agree on the importance of form when creating either uniform headings or uniform titles. Paths diverge at the point of application. Effective collocation by means of uniform titles is entirely dependent on whether or not the option to establish them is exercised. In this article, we explore how the concept and treatment of "uniform title" has evolved within Anglo-American cataloging codes, and is changing within RDA: Resource Description and Access.

0.0032224553 = product of:
  0.012889821 = sum of:
    0.012889821 = weight(_text_:for in 3478) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012889821 = score(doc=3478,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08876751 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047278564 = queryNorm
        0.14520876 = fieldWeight in 3478, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3478)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Content

Beitrag in einem Special issue: A Festschrift for Clare Beghtol

0.0032224553 = product of:
  0.012889821 = sum of:
    0.012889821 = weight(_text_:for in 2180) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012889821 = score(doc=2180,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08876751 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047278564 = queryNorm
        0.14520876 = fieldWeight in 2180, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2180)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.0023017537 = product of:
  0.009207015 = sum of:
    0.009207015 = weight(_text_:for in 2281) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009207015 = score(doc=2281,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08876751 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
          0.047278564 = queryNorm
        0.103720546 = fieldWeight in 2281, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.8775425 = idf(docFreq=18385, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2281)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Content

For individuals whose memory and language are intact, making sense of unfamiliar information or objects is a process of matching what is unknown, to what is known through previous learning or experience. The unfamiliar is linked to clusters or categories of the familiar, identifying what is "like" or "nearly like" and excluding all others (De Mey 1982). Most commonly, these are categories on which there is general agreement, sometimes collocated under established terms, labels, or shared naming devices. Classification systems are built on the basis of shared understandings of human knowledge and culture. When memory and/or language are impaired, how does such contextualizing and categorizing occur? Since perception is individual, can a person with cognitive impairment "make sense" of information, an object, a situation, using alternative modes of expression that are less or not language-dependent? This paper reports on preliminary results from a pilot study undertaken as part of exploratory mixed methods research examining the sense-making, sorting, categorization, and recall strategies of individuals with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) resulting from early stage dementia.