Search (56 results, page 1 of 3)

  • × author_ss:"Zumer, M."
  1. Zumer, M.: Guidelines for (electronic) national bibliographies : work in progress (2005) 0.05 
    0.05000048 = product of:
  0.11666779 = sum of:
    0.018568728 = weight(_text_:of in 4346) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018568728 = score(doc=4346,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.06866331 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043909185 = queryNorm
        0.2704316 = fieldWeight in 4346, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4346)
    0.07727726 = weight(_text_:congress in 4346) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07727726 = score(doc=4346,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.20946044 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.7703104 = idf(docFreq=1018, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043909185 = queryNorm
        0.36893487 = fieldWeight in 4346, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.7703104 = idf(docFreq=1018, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4346)
    0.02082181 = product of:
      0.04164362 = sum of:
        0.04164362 = weight(_text_:22 in 4346) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04164362 = score(doc=4346,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15376249 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043909185 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4346, 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=4346)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.42857143 = coord(3/7)
    Abstract
    The Working group on Guidelines for (electronic) national bibliographies has started the work with an analysis of users and use of national bibliographies (NB). In addition to the well known importance of NB for libraries and librarians, other users and their requirements were identified. The results are presented and discussed; both existing and potential users and use were taken into account. The group will continue the work by specifying the functionality to support the various needs of different users.
    Date
    1.11.2005 18:56:22
    Footnote
    Vortrag, World Library and Information Congress: 71th IFLA General Conference and Council "Libraries - A voyage of discovery", August 14th - 18th 2005, Oslo, Norway.
  2. O'Neill, E.; Zumer, M.; Mixter, J.: FRBR aggregates : their types and frequency in library collections (2015) 0.05 
    0.045168687 = product of:
  0.1053936 = sum of:
    0.023607321 = weight(_text_:of in 2610) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023607321 = score(doc=2610,freq=22.0), product of:
        0.06866331 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043909185 = queryNorm
        0.34381276 = fieldWeight in 2610, product of:
          4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
            22.0 = termFreq=22.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2610)
    0.06393902 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 2610) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06393902 = score(doc=2610,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.17305137 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043909185 = queryNorm
        0.36948 = fieldWeight in 2610, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2610)
    0.017847266 = product of:
      0.035694532 = sum of:
        0.035694532 = weight(_text_:22 in 2610) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035694532 = score(doc=2610,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15376249 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043909185 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2610, 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=2610)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.42857143 = coord(3/7)
    Abstract
    Aggregates have been a frequent topic of discussion between library science researchers. This study seeks to better understand aggregates through the analysis of a sample of bibliographic records and review of the cataloging treatment of aggregates. The study focuses on determining how common aggregates are in library collections, what types of aggregates exist, how aggregates are described in bibliographic records, and the criteria for identifying aggregates from the information in bibliographic records. A sample of bibliographic records representing textual resources was taken from OCLC's WorldCat database. More than 20 percent of the sampled records represented aggregates and more works were embodied in aggregates than were embodied in single work manifestations. A variety of issues, including cataloging practices and the varying definitions of aggregates, made it difficult to accurately identify and quantify the presence of aggregates using only the information from bibliographic records.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  3. Pauman Budanovic, M.; Zumer, M.: Prototype cataloging interface based on the IFLA Library Reference Model (LRM). Part 1 : conceptual design (2021) 0.04 
    0.041660458 = product of:
  0.1458116 = sum of:
    0.016608374 = weight(_text_:of in 700) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016608374 = score(doc=700,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.06866331 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043909185 = queryNorm
        0.24188137 = fieldWeight in 700, 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=700)
    0.12920323 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 700) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12920323 = score(doc=700,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.17305137 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043909185 = queryNorm
        0.7466178 = fieldWeight in 700, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=700)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    Abstract
    The aim of this paper is to present a prototype cataloging interface, which provides easier data entry, follows the cataloger's thought process and is based on the advantages of the IFLA LRM model. The paper summarizes all stages of the conceptual design and shows how the LRM was implemented. The main purpose of the cataloging interface design is to show how a LRM-based cataloging module might look like and how it could improve the existing cataloging process.
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 59(2021) no.7, p.619-643
  4. Budanovic, M.P.; Zumer, M.: ¬The catalogers' thought process : a comparison of formal and informal context (2018) 0.04 
    0.035952866 = product of:
  0.12583503 = sum of:
    0.02034102 = weight(_text_:of in 5180) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02034102 = score(doc=5180,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.06866331 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043909185 = queryNorm
        0.29624295 = fieldWeight in 5180, 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=5180)
    0.10549401 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 5180) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10549401 = score(doc=5180,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.17305137 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043909185 = queryNorm
        0.6096109 = fieldWeight in 5180, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5180)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    Abstract
    The aim of this article is to analyze how catalogers describe publications without cataloging tools in comparison with the current cataloging process. A total of 46 catalogers took part in the first study, a free description of monographic publications, while 30 catalogers performed original cataloging in their actual environment. A combination of observations and think-aloud protocols was used for data gathering in both studies. The focus was on Slovenian catalogers from different types and sizes of libraries. Results revealed both differences and similarities between catalogers' mental models in the respective studies.
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 56(2018) no.5/6, S.507-529
  5. Mitchell, J.S.; Zeng, M.L.; Zumer, M.: Modeling classification systems in multicultural and multilingual contexts (2014) 0.03 
    0.032351412 = product of:
  0.07548663 = sum of:
    0.016776992 = weight(_text_:of in 1962) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016776992 = score(doc=1962,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.06866331 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043909185 = queryNorm
        0.24433708 = fieldWeight in 1962, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1962)
    0.03767643 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 1962) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03767643 = score(doc=1962,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17305137 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043909185 = queryNorm
        0.21771818 = fieldWeight in 1962, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1962)
    0.021033203 = product of:
      0.042066406 = sum of:
        0.042066406 = weight(_text_:22 in 1962) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042066406 = score(doc=1962,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15376249 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043909185 = queryNorm
            0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 1962, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1962)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.42857143 = coord(3/7)
    Abstract
    This article reports on the second part of an initiative of the authors on researching classification systems with the conceptual model defined by the Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data (FRSAD) final report. In an earlier study, the authors explored whether the FRSAD conceptual model could be extended beyond subject authority data to model classification data. The focus of the current study is to determine if classification data modeled using FRSAD can be used to solve real-world discovery problems in multicultural and multilingual contexts. The article discusses the relationships between entities (same type or different types) in the context of classification systems that involve multiple translations and/or multicultural implementations. Results of two case studies are presented in detail: (a) two instances of the Dewey Decimal Classification [DDC] (DDC 22 in English, and the Swedish-English mixed translation of DDC 22), and (b) Chinese Library Classification. The use cases of conceptual models in practice are also discussed.
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 52(2014) no.1, S.90-101
  6. Zeng, M.L.; Gracy, K.F.; Zumer, M.: Using a semantic analysis tool to generate subject access points : a study using Panofsky's theory and two research samples (2014) 0.03 
    0.031339366 = product of:
  0.07312518 = sum of:
    0.010066194 = weight(_text_:of in 1464) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.010066194 = score(doc=1464,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06866331 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043909185 = queryNorm
        0.14660224 = fieldWeight in 1464, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1464)
    0.045211717 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 1464) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.045211717 = score(doc=1464,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17305137 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043909185 = queryNorm
        0.26126182 = fieldWeight in 1464, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1464)
    0.017847266 = product of:
      0.035694532 = sum of:
        0.035694532 = weight(_text_:22 in 1464) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035694532 = score(doc=1464,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15376249 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043909185 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1464, 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=1464)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.42857143 = coord(3/7)
    Abstract
    This paper attempts to explore an approach of using an automatic semantic analysis tool to enhance the "subject" access to materials that are not included in the usual library subject cataloging process. Using two research samples the authors analyzed the access points supplied by OpenCalais, a semantic analysis tool. As an aid in understanding how computerized subject analysis might be approached, this paper suggests using the three-layer framework that has been accepted and applied in image analysis, developed by Erwin Panofsky.
    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
  7. Zumer, M.: ¬The new "Guidelines for national bibliographies in the digital age" (2007) 0.03 
    0.027384568 = product of:
  0.09584598 = sum of:
    0.018568728 = weight(_text_:of in 696) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018568728 = score(doc=696,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.06866331 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043909185 = queryNorm
        0.2704316 = fieldWeight in 696, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=696)
    0.07727726 = weight(_text_:congress in 696) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07727726 = score(doc=696,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.20946044 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.7703104 = idf(docFreq=1018, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043909185 = queryNorm
        0.36893487 = fieldWeight in 696, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.7703104 = idf(docFreq=1018, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=696)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    Abstract
    The Working group on Guidelines for (electronic) national bibliographies was established in 2004 has started the work with an analysis of users and contexts of use of national bibliographies (NB) in the digital age. National bibliographies are changing dramatically: they include more and more also bibliographic records for digital resources and national bibliographic agencies are increasingly complementing (or even replacing) printed versions of NB with electronic. The guidelines will be soon posted for the world-wide review; this paper gives and overview of the document prepared so far.
    Content
    Vortrag anlässlich: WORLD LIBRARY AND INFORMATION CONGRESS: 73RD IFLA GENERAL CONFERENCE AND COUNCIL 19-23 August 2007, Durban, South Africa. - 89 - Bibliography with National Libraries and Classification and Indexing
  8. Zumer, M.; Zeng, M.L.; Salaba, A.: FRSAD: conceptual modeling of aboutness (2012) 0.03 
    0.026058258 = product of:
  0.0912039 = sum of:
    0.016608374 = weight(_text_:of in 1960) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016608374 = score(doc=1960,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.06866331 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043909185 = queryNorm
        0.24188137 = fieldWeight in 1960, 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=1960)
    0.074595526 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 1960) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.074595526 = score(doc=1960,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.17305137 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043909185 = queryNorm
        0.43106002 = fieldWeight in 1960, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1960)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    Abstract
    This book offers the first comprehensive exploration of the development and use of the International Federation of Library Association's newly released model for subject authority data, covering everything from the rationale for creating the model to practical steps for implementing it.
    Footnote
    Rez. in: Cataloging and classification quarterly 52(2014) no.3, S.343-346 (T. Brenndorfer)
    Series
    Third millennium cataloging
  9. Pauman Budanovic, M.; Zumer, M.: Prototype cataloging interface based on the IFLA Library Reference Model (LRM). Part 2 : usability evaluation (2021) 0.03 
    0.025422515 = product of:
  0.0889788 = sum of:
    0.014383274 = weight(_text_:of in 714) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014383274 = score(doc=714,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.06866331 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043909185 = queryNorm
        0.20947541 = fieldWeight in 714, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=714)
    0.074595526 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 714) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.074595526 = score(doc=714,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.17305137 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043909185 = queryNorm
        0.43106002 = fieldWeight in 714, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=714)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    Abstract
    This paper reports on usability evaluation that was carried out to evaluate the LRM-based prototype interface, presented in Part 1. A combination of focus group, Wizard of Oz method, and think-aloud protocol was used. The study was conducted in May 2019 with seven Slovenian catalogers from Maribor Public Library. Although participants had some difficulties understanding the LRM model, the user interface proved to be quite easy to use, quick to understand, and transparent. The functionality of the proposed prototype proved to be adequate, since the catalogers successfully and independently completed all the tasks without major problems and errors.
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 59(2021) no.7, p.644-668
  10. Zumer, M.; Zeng, L.: Comparison and evaluation of OPAC end-user interfaces (1994) 0.02 
    0.02328677 = product of:
  0.08150369 = sum of:
    0.021221403 = weight(_text_:of in 3568) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021221403 = score(doc=3568,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.06866331 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043909185 = queryNorm
        0.3090647 = fieldWeight in 3568, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3568)
    0.06028229 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 3568) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06028229 = score(doc=3568,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17305137 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043909185 = queryNorm
        0.3483491 = fieldWeight in 3568, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3568)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    Abstract
    Compares and evaluates the functional capabilities and interface characteristics of OPACs from the user oriented perspective, using a systematic framework. OPACs of OhioLINK and its 16 member libraries are the object of the investigation. The interfaces used 6 system software but showed a variety of features in access to OPACs, operational control, access points, search formulation control, and user assistance. Interface design alternatives are identified and qualitatively analyzed
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 19(1994) no.2, S.67-98
  11. Zumer, M.: Implementation of FRBR : European research initiative (2004) 0.02 
    0.02328677 = product of:
  0.08150369 = sum of:
    0.021221403 = weight(_text_:of in 5858) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021221403 = score(doc=5858,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.06866331 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043909185 = queryNorm
        0.3090647 = fieldWeight in 5858, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5858)
    0.06028229 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 5858) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06028229 = score(doc=5858,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17305137 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043909185 = queryNorm
        0.3483491 = fieldWeight in 5858, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5858)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    Abstract
    The short history of European FRBR research is summarized. Immediately following the publication there was a lot of discussion, focusing mainly on the model itself and its appropriateness for description of library materials. Only later the focus has shifted towards implementation issues. Main topics are identified and two initiatives, originating from ELAG and IFLA, are described. An agenda of future research, which should result in FRBR implementation, is proposed.
    Series
    Cataloging and classification quarterly; 39, nos.3/4
  12. Riva, P.; Doerr, M.; Zumer, M.: FRBRoo: enabling a common view of information from memory institutions (2008) 0.02 
    0.02233454 = product of:
  0.07817089 = sum of:
    0.022972843 = weight(_text_:of in 3743) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022972843 = score(doc=3743,freq=30.0), product of:
        0.06866331 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043909185 = queryNorm
        0.33457235 = fieldWeight in 3743, product of:
          5.477226 = tf(freq=30.0), with freq of:
            30.0 = termFreq=30.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3743)
    0.055198044 = weight(_text_:congress in 3743) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.055198044 = score(doc=3743,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.20946044 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.7703104 = idf(docFreq=1018, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043909185 = queryNorm
        0.26352492 = fieldWeight in 3743, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.7703104 = idf(docFreq=1018, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3743)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    Abstract
    In 2008 the FRBR/CRM Harmonisation Working Group has achieved a major milestone: a complete version of the object-oriented definition of FRBR (FRBRoo) was released for comment. After a brief overview of the history and context of the Working Group, this paper focuses on the primary contributions resulting from this work. - FRBRoo is a self-contained document which expresses the concepts of FRBR using the objectoriented methodology and framework of CIDOC CRM. It is an alternative view on library conceptualisation for a different purpose, not a replacement for FRBR. - This 'translation' process presented an opportunity to verify and confirm FRBR's internal consistency. - FRBRoo offers a common view of library and museum documentation as two kinds of information from memory institutions. Such a common view is necessary to provide interoperable information systems for all users interested in accessing common or related content. - The analysis provided an opportunity for mutual enrichment of FRBR and CIDOC CRM. Examples include: - - Addition of the modelling of time and events to FRBR, which can be seen in its application to the publishing process - - Clarification of the manifestation entity - - Explicit modelling of performances and recordings in FRBR - - Adding the work entity to CRM - - Adding the identifier assignment process to CRM. - Producing a formalisation which is more suited for implementation with object-oriented tools, and which facilitates the testing and adoption of FRBR concepts in implementations with different functional specifications and in different environments.
    Content
    Beitrag während: World library and information congress: 74th IFLA general conference and council, 10-14 August 2008, Québec, Canada.
  13. Harej, V.; Zumer, M.: Analysis of FRBR user tasks (2013) 0.02 
    0.021920092 = product of:
  0.07672032 = sum of:
    0.016438028 = weight(_text_:of in 1955) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016438028 = score(doc=1955,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.06866331 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043909185 = queryNorm
        0.23940048 = fieldWeight in 1955, 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=1955)
    0.06028229 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 1955) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06028229 = score(doc=1955,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17305137 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043909185 = queryNorm
        0.3483491 = fieldWeight in 1955, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1955)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    Abstract
    FRBR, FRAD, and FRSAD models propose user tasks as a way to address and categorize functions that a catalog should support. The user tasks are not harmonized among these models, but to do that, they should first be fully understood and analyzed, especially "select" and "identify." We decided to look at the FRBR user tasks from the perspective of interactive information retrieval (IIR). Several IIR models were reviewed and Ellis' and Belkin's models were chosen for further analysis and interpretation of FRBR "select" and "identify" tasks.
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 51(2013) no.7, S.741-759
  14. Svab, K.; Zumer, M.: ¬The value of a library catalog for selecting children's picture books (2015) 0.02 
    0.020375926 = product of:
  0.071315736 = sum of:
    0.018568728 = weight(_text_:of in 2614) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018568728 = score(doc=2614,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.06866331 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043909185 = queryNorm
        0.2704316 = fieldWeight in 2614, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2614)
    0.052747004 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 2614) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.052747004 = score(doc=2614,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17305137 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043909185 = queryNorm
        0.30480546 = fieldWeight in 2614, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2614)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    Abstract
    The aim of this study was to determine how parents select picture books for their children and which bibliographic data are important as they choose between different versions of the same title. Thirty-six parents of preschool children aged one to six years were interviewed and observed as they chose one version of the picture book Cinderella from among six bibliographic records and then selected from among six physical versions. Parents described the criteria and the reasons for their selections. The results indicate that the parents experienced difficulties using the library catalog and that the current bibliographic elements are inadequate.
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 53(2015) no.7, S.717-737
  15. Aalberg, T.; O'Neill, E.; Zumer, M.: Extending the LRM Model to integrating resources (2021) 0.02 
    0.018425971 = product of:
  0.0644909 = sum of:
    0.011743895 = weight(_text_:of in 295) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011743895 = score(doc=295,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.06866331 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043909185 = queryNorm
        0.17103596 = fieldWeight in 295, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=295)
    0.052747004 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 295) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.052747004 = score(doc=295,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17305137 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043909185 = queryNorm
        0.30480546 = fieldWeight in 295, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=295)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    Abstract
    Integrating resources are distinct in that they change over time in such a way that their previous content is replaced with updated content. This study examines how integrating resources can be modeled using the entities and relationships of the IFLA Library Reference Model (LRM) and clarifies how they can be identified. While monographs have been extensively analyzed, integrating resources have received very little attention. Applying the model unmodified to integrating resources is neither practical nor theoretically sound. With the addition of two proposed relationships, the model can be extended to accommodate the diachronic relationship intrinsic between expressions and manifestations exhibited by integrating resources.
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 59(2021) no.1, S.11-27
  16. Zumer, M.; O'Neill, E.T.: Modeling aggregates in FRBR (2012) 0.02 
    0.016984992 = product of:
  0.059447467 = sum of:
    0.01423575 = weight(_text_:of in 1913) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01423575 = score(doc=1913,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.06866331 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043909185 = queryNorm
        0.20732689 = fieldWeight in 1913, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1913)
    0.045211717 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 1913) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.045211717 = score(doc=1913,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17305137 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043909185 = queryNorm
        0.26126182 = fieldWeight in 1913, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1913)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    Abstract
    In the bibliographic environment, the term aggregate is used to describe a bibliographic entity formed by combining distinct bibliographic units together. Aggregates are a large and growing class of information resources-up to twenty percent of the bibliographic records in OCLC's WorldCat may represent aggregates. The Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records: Final Report only briefly references aggregates. Difficulties and inconsistencies in the application of the FRBR model to aggregates have been identified as a significant impediment to FRBR implementation. To address the issue, the FRBR Review Group established a Working Group on Aggregates which completed its charge and submitted its final report in 2011. The Working Group proposed that an aggregate be defined as a "manifestation embodying multiple distinct expressions". This paper examines the proposed definition and explores how aggregates can be modeled.
    Content
    Contribution to a special issue "The FRBR family of conceptual models: toward a linked future"
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 50(2012) no.5/7, S.456-472
  17. Dimec, Z.; Zumer, M.; Riesthuis, G.J.A.: Slovenian cataloguing practice and Functional Requirements for Bibliography Records : a comparative analysis (2004) 0.02 
    0.01584889 = product of:
  0.055471115 = sum of:
    0.017794685 = weight(_text_:of in 5857) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017794685 = score(doc=5857,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.06866331 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043909185 = queryNorm
        0.25915858 = fieldWeight in 5857, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5857)
    0.03767643 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 5857) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03767643 = score(doc=5857,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17305137 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043909185 = queryNorm
        0.21771818 = fieldWeight in 5857, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5857)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    Abstract
    The IFLA study Functional requirements for bibliographic records (FRBR) set a new frame for both cataloguing codes and subject analysis. The Paris Principles defined the functions of the catalogue followed by both cataloguing codes used in Slovenia: P. Kalan's Abecedni imenski katalog and E. Verona's Pravilnik i prirunik za izradbe abecednih kataloga. FRBR defines the functions for records themselves, irrespective of the type of the database consisting of these records. Compared to the requirements for the national bibliographic records as defined by FRBR, the records belonging to the Slovenian national bibliography show more descriptive elements and less notes on bibliographic history, which reflects in lack of uniform titles. As the uniform title itself enables the identification of related works and their expressions, this practice does not satisfy the FRBR requirements. Differences in the extent of records for different types of material derive from decentralised processing at the National and University Library. It is therefore necessary to establish uniform criteria for both the materials included into the Slovenian national bibliography, and the extent of data elements.
    Series
    Cataloging and classification quarterly; 39, nos.3/4
  18. Doerr, M.; Riva, P.; Zumer, M.: FRBR entities : identity and identification (2012) 0.01 
    0.014363867 = product of:
  0.050273534 = sum of:
    0.020132389 = weight(_text_:of in 1917) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020132389 = score(doc=1917,freq=36.0), product of:
        0.06866331 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043909185 = queryNorm
        0.2932045 = fieldWeight in 1917, product of:
          6.0 = tf(freq=36.0), with freq of:
            36.0 = termFreq=36.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1917)
    0.030141145 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 1917) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030141145 = score(doc=1917,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17305137 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043909185 = queryNorm
        0.17417455 = fieldWeight in 1917, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1917)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    Abstract
    The models in the FRBR family include ways to document names or terms for all entities defined in the models, with identification as the ultimate aim, i.e., to distinguish entities by unique appellations and to use the most reliable appellations for entities in a given context. The intention in this paper is to explore the interrelationships between these different models with regards to their treatment of names, identifiers and other appellation entities. The specialisation/generalisation structure of the appellation-related entities and the relationships and properties of these entities will be discussed. The paper also tries to clarify the potential confusion of identity itself in this context - when are we talking about an entity via its name, about the name itself, about the name citation in a document and when about a name of name? In FRBR(er), titles for group 1, names for group 2 and terms for group 3 entities are merely defined as attributes of these entities. This serves the basic requirement of associating the appellation (label) with the entity, but does not allow introducing attributes of these appellations or relationships between and among them. FRAD, completed a decade later, defined as entities name, identifier, and controlled access point. Clearly making the distinction between a bibliographic entity and its name is a significant step taken in FRAD. This permits the separate treatment of relationships between the persons, families, and corporate bodies themselves and those relationships which instead operate between their names or between the controlled access points based on those names. In FRSAD, the most recent model, two entities are defined, Thema and Nomen. Again, the bibliographic entity is distinguished from the full range of its appellations. The FRBRoo model expanded on the treatment of appellations and identifiers in CRM by modeling the identifier assignment process. In FRBRoo, F12 Name was defined but identified with the existing CRM entity E41 Appellation. Current development is concentrating on integrating FRAD and FRSAD concepts into FRBRoo, and this is putting a focus on naming and appellations, causing new classes and properties to be defined, and requiring a re-evaluation of some of the decisions previously made in FRBRoo. As naming and appellations are such a significant feature of the FRBR family of conceptual models, this work is an important step in towards the consolidation of the models into a single coherent statement of the bibliographic universe.
    Content
    Contribution to a special issue "The FRBR family of conceptual models: toward a linked future"
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 50(2012) no.5/7, S.517-541
  19. Zumer, M.; Clavel, G.: EDLproject : one more step towards the European digtial library (2007) 0.01 
    0.014265795 = product of:
  0.049930282 = sum of:
    0.01423575 = weight(_text_:of in 3184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01423575 = score(doc=3184,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06866331 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043909185 = queryNorm
        0.20732689 = fieldWeight in 3184, 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=3184)
    0.035694532 = product of:
      0.071389064 = sum of:
        0.071389064 = weight(_text_:22 in 3184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.071389064 = score(doc=3184,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15376249 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043909185 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 3184, 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=3184)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    Content
    Vortrag anläasslich des Workshops: "Extending the multilingual capacity of The European Library in the EDL project Stockholm, Swedish National Library, 22-23 November 2007".
  20. Mitchell, J.S.; Zeng, M.L.; Zumer, M.: Modeling classification systems in multicultural and multilingual contexts (2012) 0.01 
    0.012963497 = product of:
  0.045372237 = sum of:
    0.020132389 = weight(_text_:of in 1967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020132389 = score(doc=1967,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.06866331 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.043909185 = queryNorm
        0.2932045 = fieldWeight in 1967, 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=1967)
    0.025239848 = product of:
      0.050479695 = sum of:
        0.050479695 = weight(_text_:22 in 1967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.050479695 = score(doc=1967,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15376249 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.043909185 = queryNorm
            0.32829654 = fieldWeight in 1967, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1967)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    Abstract
    This paper reports on the second part of an initiative of the authors on researching classification systems with the conceptual model defined by the Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data (FRSAD) final report. In an earlier study, the authors explored whether the FRSAD conceptual model could be extended beyond subject authority data to model classification data. The focus of the current study is to determine if classification data modeled using FRSAD can be used to solve real-world discovery problems in multicultural and multilingual contexts. The paper discusses the relationships between entities (same type or different types) in the context of classification systems that involve multiple translations and /or multicultural implementations. Results of two case studies are presented in detail: (a) two instances of the DDC (DDC 22 in English, and the Swedish-English mixed translation of DDC 22), and (b) Chinese Library Classification. The use cases of conceptual models in practice are also discussed.

Authors

Years

Types

  • a 46
  • el 12
  • r 2
  • m 1
  • n 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications