Search (314 results, page 1 of 16)

  • × year_i:[2000 TO 2010}
  • × theme_ss:"Formalerschließung"
  1. Azevedo Lourenço, C. de; Alvarenga, L.: Metadata standard of theses and dissertations according to the entity-relationship model (2009) 0.10 
    0.09727222 = product of:
  0.1296963 = sum of:
    0.014565565 = weight(_text_:information in 3078) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014565565 = score(doc=3078,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 3078, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3078)
    0.093888626 = weight(_text_:standards in 3078) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.093888626 = score(doc=3078,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.41783947 = fieldWeight in 3078, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3078)
    0.021242103 = product of:
      0.042484205 = sum of:
        0.042484205 = weight(_text_:organization in 3078) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042484205 = score(doc=3078,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.23635197 = fieldWeight in 3078, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3078)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)
    Abstract
    With the automation of information systems and with the advent of digital libraries, norms, standards and techniques of library studies have been widely discussed, analyzed, reevaluated and reorganized. In this article the results of doctoral research, in which the Brazilian Metadata Standard for Theses and Dissertations (MTD-BR) was analyzed, is presented. This standard has been utilized in the digital Library of Theses and Dissertations Project, of the Instituto Brasileiro de Informação em Ciência e Tecnologia, IBICT (Brazilian Institute for Scientific and Technological Information), with the methodology of data modeling, according to the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR), which is based on the Entity- Relationship Model. It was concluded that new studies should be carried out applying this methodology to other metadata standards, even if they are analyzed with other data modeling tools, such as the object-oriented model, and considering its relationship with the guidelines, principles and instruments of library studies.
    Source
    Knowledge organization. 36(2009) no.1, S.30-45
  2. Hill, J.S.: Analog people for digital dreams : staffing and educational considerations for cataloging and metadata professionals (2005) 0.10 
    0.09718057 = product of:
  0.12957409 = sum of:
    0.013732546 = weight(_text_:information in 126) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013732546 = score(doc=126,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 126, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=126)
    0.088519044 = weight(_text_:standards in 126) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.088519044 = score(doc=126,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.39394283 = fieldWeight in 126, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=126)
    0.027322493 = product of:
      0.054644987 = sum of:
        0.054644987 = weight(_text_:22 in 126) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.054644987 = score(doc=126,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 126, 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=126)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)
    Abstract
    As libraries attempt to incorporate increasing amounts of electronic resources into their catalogs, utilizing a growing variety of metadata standards, library and information science programs are grappling with how to educate catalogers to meet these challenges. In this paper, an employer considers the characteristics and skills that catalogers will need and how they might acquire them.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  3. Parent, I.: IFLA Section on Cataloguing: "Why in the World?" (2000) 0.09 
    0.09350993 = product of:
  0.1246799 = sum of:
    0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01029941 = score(doc=188,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 188, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=188)
    0.093888626 = weight(_text_:standards in 188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.093888626 = score(doc=188,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.41783947 = fieldWeight in 188, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=188)
    0.02049187 = product of:
      0.04098374 = sum of:
        0.04098374 = weight(_text_:22 in 188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04098374 = score(doc=188,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 188, 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=188)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)
    Abstract
    The Bibliographic Control Division of the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA) consists of three sections: bibliography, cataloguing, and classification. The cataloguing section, which focuses on descriptive cataloguing, is one of the oldest within IFLA, having been founded in 1935 as the IFLA Committee on Uniform Cataloguing Rules. It became the Committee on Cataloguing in 1970. The committee played a key role in planning and convening the International Conference on Cataloguing Principles held in Paris in 1961 and the International Meeting of Cataloguing Experts held in Copenhagen in 1969. The Copenhagen conference provided the impetus to develop the International Standard Bibliographic Descriptions (ISBD). The Committee on Cataloguing established a systematic process for the revision of the ISBDs. The cataloguing section focuses on traditional cataloguing standards and on the impact of electronic resources and technology on these standards. The section has initiated several projects at the international level to facilitate access to information.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  4. Khurshid, Z.: ¬The impact of information technology an job requirements and qualifications for catalogers (2003) 0.09 
    0.09163023 = product of:
  0.12217364 = sum of:
    0.020812286 = weight(_text_:information in 2323) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020812286 = score(doc=2323,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.23515764 = fieldWeight in 2323, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2323)
    0.077454165 = weight(_text_:standards in 2323) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.077454165 = score(doc=2323,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.34469998 = fieldWeight in 2323, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2323)
    0.023907183 = product of:
      0.047814365 = sum of:
        0.047814365 = weight(_text_:22 in 2323) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047814365 = score(doc=2323,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2323, 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=2323)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)
    Abstract
    Information technology (IT) encompassing an integrated library system, computer hardware and software, CDROM, Internet, and other domains, including MARC 21 formats, CORC, and metadata standards (Dublin Core, TEI, XML, RDF) has produced far-reaching changes in the job functions of catalogers. Libraries are now coming up with a new set of recruiting requirements for these positions. This paper aims to review job advertisements published in American Libraries (AL) and College and Research Libraries News (C&RL NEWS) to assess the impact of the use of IT in libraries an job requirements and qualifications for catalogers.
    Source
    Information technology and libraries. 22(2003) no. March, S.18-21
  5. Bothmann, R.: Cataloging electronic books (2004) 0.09 
    0.09163023 = product of:
  0.12217364 = sum of:
    0.020812286 = weight(_text_:information in 129) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020812286 = score(doc=129,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.23515764 = fieldWeight in 129, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=129)
    0.077454165 = weight(_text_:standards in 129) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.077454165 = score(doc=129,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.34469998 = fieldWeight in 129, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=129)
    0.023907183 = product of:
      0.047814365 = sum of:
        0.047814365 = weight(_text_:22 in 129) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047814365 = score(doc=129,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 129, 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=129)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)
    Abstract
    Papers on the cataloging of electronic resources have focused on electronic journals and Internet resources such as Web sites and not on electronic books. Electronic books are nonserial monographic resources accessed with a computer either directly or remotely. Rules and standards for cataloging electronic resources have changed and continue to change. This article discusses the electronic book as a unique manifestation and provides practical instruction on the application of current cataloging rules. The cataloging elements covered are control fields and variable data fields, including classification, uniform titles, title information, edition information, type and extent of the resource, publication and distribution information, physical description, series statements, notes, and subject analysis.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  6. Descriptive standards and the archival profession (2003) 0.09 
    0.08595075 = product of:
  0.1719015 = sum of:
    0.01699316 = weight(_text_:information in 5634) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01699316 = score(doc=5634,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.1920054 = fieldWeight in 5634, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5634)
    0.15490833 = weight(_text_:standards in 5634) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.15490833 = score(doc=5634,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.68939996 = fieldWeight in 5634, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5634)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Studies of professions emphasize various means by which an occupation increases its authority over areas of activity within its jurisdiction. Development of standards and codification of knowledge are important stages in professionalization for any occupation. As technology became a more prevalent component of library bibliographic access, archivists began to seek ways to develop standards for archival description that would support information exchange and allow archives and manuscripts collections to be included in bibliographic utilities. This article describes the evolution of archival descriptive standards, beginning in the late 1970s, within the context of the development of the archival profession.
    Imprint
    New York : Haworth Information Press
  7. Davis, S.E.: Descriptive standards and the archival profession (2003) 0.08 
    0.08346216 = product of:
  0.16692431 = sum of:
    0.012015978 = weight(_text_:information in 5635) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012015978 = score(doc=5635,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 5635, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5635)
    0.15490833 = weight(_text_:standards in 5635) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.15490833 = score(doc=5635,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.68939996 = fieldWeight in 5635, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5635)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Studies of professions emphasize various means by which an occupation increases its authority over areas of activity within its jurisdiction. Development of standards and codification of knowledge are important stages in professionalization for any occupation. As technology became a more prevalent component of library bibliographic access, archivists began to seek ways to develop standards for archival description that would support information exchange and allow archives and manuscripts collections to be included in bibliographic utilities. This article describes the evolution of archival descriptive standards, beginning in the late 1970s, within the context of the development of the archival profession.
  8. Dorner, D.: Cataloging in the 21st century : pt.2: digitization and information standards (2000) 0.08 
    0.07668869 = product of:
  0.15337738 = sum of:
    0.02059882 = weight(_text_:information in 515) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02059882 = score(doc=515,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 515, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=515)
    0.13277857 = weight(_text_:standards in 515) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.13277857 = score(doc=515,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.59091425 = fieldWeight in 515, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=515)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
  9. Cunningham, A.: Dynamic descriptions : recent developments in standards for archival description and metadata (2000) 0.08 
    0.07668869 = product of:
  0.15337738 = sum of:
    0.02059882 = weight(_text_:information in 2473) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02059882 = score(doc=2473,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.23274569 = fieldWeight in 2473, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2473)
    0.13277857 = weight(_text_:standards in 2473) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.13277857 = score(doc=2473,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.59091425 = fieldWeight in 2473, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2473)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Source
    Canadian journal of information and library science. 25(2000) no.4, S.3-17
  10. Park, J.-r.; Lu, C.; Marion, L.: Cataloging professionals in the digital environment : a content analysis of job descriptions (2009) 0.08 
    0.07608504 = product of:
  0.10144672 = sum of:
    0.014565565 = weight(_text_:information in 2766) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014565565 = score(doc=2766,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 2766, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2766)
    0.066389285 = weight(_text_:standards in 2766) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.066389285 = score(doc=2766,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.29545712 = fieldWeight in 2766, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2766)
    0.02049187 = product of:
      0.04098374 = sum of:
        0.04098374 = weight(_text_:22 in 2766) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04098374 = score(doc=2766,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2766, 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=2766)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)
    Abstract
    This study assesses the current state of responsibilities and skill sets required of cataloging professionals. It identifies emerging roles and competencies focusing on the digital environment and relates these to the established knowledge of traditional cataloging standards and practices. We conducted a content analysis of 349 job descriptions advertised in AutoCAT in 2005-2006. Multivariate techniques of cluster and multidimensional-scaling analyses were applied to the data. Analysis of job titles, required and preferred qualifications/skills, and responsibilities lends perspective to the roles that cataloging professionals play in the digital environment. Technological advances increasingly demand knowledge and skills related to electronic resource management, metadata creation, and computer and Web applications. Emerging knowledge and skill sets are increasingly being integrated into the core technical aspects of cataloging such as bibliographic and authority control and integrated library-system management. Management of cataloging functions is also in high demand. The results of the study provide insight on current and future curriculum design of library and information-science programs.
    Date
    22. 3.2009 19:20:24
    Source
    Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.4, S.844-857
  11. Arsenault, C.; Leide, J.E.: Format integration and the design of cataloging and classification curricula (2002) 0.07 
    0.0734481 = product of:
  0.0979308 = sum of:
    0.01029941 = weight(_text_:information in 5456) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01029941 = score(doc=5456,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 5456, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5456)
    0.066389285 = weight(_text_:standards in 5456) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.066389285 = score(doc=5456,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.29545712 = fieldWeight in 5456, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5456)
    0.021242103 = product of:
      0.042484205 = sum of:
        0.042484205 = weight(_text_:organization in 5456) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042484205 = score(doc=5456,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.23635197 = fieldWeight in 5456, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5456)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)
    Abstract
    Cataloging is a dynamic and ever changing activity. Developments in codes and standards create a need for continuing reconsideration of the design of our curricula. Format integration, in particular, raises questions about the structure of curricula for cataloging and classification. The issues relating to differing formats of materials are not new, but the process of standardization of treatment, which was begun quite tentatively in the development of the Anglo-American Cataloging Rules (AACR) has blossomed to the fore in the ensuing years. This paper examines the historical context of the integration of formats before addressing the continuing arguments that maintain that all types of materials should be treated in an introductory course as opposed to those that assert that format issues should not be covered in any depth in an introductory course. A design for an integrated, but not exhaustive, treatment of formats in an introductory course with more detailed coverage included in advanced courses is proposed.
    Footnote
    Beitrag eines Themenheftes: Education for cataloging and the organization of information: pitfalls and the pendulum; Part I
  12. Leresche, F.: Libraries and archives : sharing standards to facilitate access to cultural heritage (2008) 0.07 
    0.06982242 = product of:
  0.13964485 = sum of:
    0.006866273 = weight(_text_:information in 1425) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006866273 = score(doc=1425,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.0775819 = fieldWeight in 1425, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1425)
    0.13277857 = weight(_text_:standards in 1425) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.13277857 = score(doc=1425,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.59091425 = fieldWeight in 1425, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1425)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    This presentation shares the French experience of collaboration between archivists and librarians, led by working groups with the Association française de normalisation (AFNOR). With the arrival of the Web, the various heritage institutions are increasingly aware of their areas of commonality and the need for interoperability between their catalogues. This is particularly true for archives and libraries, which have developed standards for meeting their specific needs Regarding document description, but which are now seeking to establish a dialogue for defining a coherent set of standards to which professionals in both communities can refer. After discussing the characteristics of the collections held respectively in archives and libraries, this presentation will draw a portrait of the standards established by the two professional communities in the following areas: - description of documents - access points in descriptions and authority records - description of functions - identification of conservation institutions and collections It is concluded from this study that the standards developed by libraries on the one hand and by archives on the other are most often complementary and that each professional community is being driven to use the standards developed by the other, or would at least profit from doing so. A dialogue between the two professions is seen today as a necessity for fostering the compatibility and interoperability of standards and documentary tools. Despite this recognition of the need for collaboration, the development of standards is still largely a compartmentalized process, and the fact that normative work is conducted within professional associations is a contributing factor. The French experience shows, however, that it is possible to create working groups where archivists and librarians unite and develop a comprehensive view of the standards and initiatives conducted by each, with the goal of articulating them as best they can for the purpose of interoperability, yet respecting the specific requirements of each.
    Content
    Beitrag während: World library and information congress: 74th IFLA general conference and council, 10-14 August 2008, Québec, Canada.
  13. Weiss, A.K.: Proliferating guidelines : a history and analysis of the cataloging of electronic resources (2003) 0.07 
    0.067740746 = product of:
  0.13548149 = sum of:
    0.114989616 = weight(_text_:standards in 71) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.114989616 = score(doc=71,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.51174676 = fieldWeight in 71, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=71)
    0.02049187 = product of:
      0.04098374 = sum of:
        0.04098374 = weight(_text_:22 in 71) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04098374 = score(doc=71,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 71, 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=71)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Cataloging rules for computer-based materials were first introduced in the 1970s, and since then have undergone almost continuous modification and revision. This article focuses on analysis and comparison of the various codes and guidelines for practice issued for what are now called electronic resources. Creation of new cataloging rules has been spurred by introduction of new physical carriers, the preeminence of materials accessed remotely versus those with physical carriers, the need for guidance in cataloging specific instances of computer-based materials, and the evolution of the theoretical concerns underlying the cataloging codes. Based on this history of constant change, it is easy to predict many more changes in the cataloging standards for computer-based materials in the future. However, continuous changes in the cataloging rules may have produced as much confusion as clarity for working catalogers. Caution should be exercised in the creation of new rules and standards for cataloging electronic resources, as it is possible that older rules and standards may, in fact, be readily adapted to new types of electronic resources.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  14. Intner, S.S.; Lazinger, S.S.; Weihs, J.: Metadata and its impact on libraries (2005) 0.07 
    0.06706659 = product of:
  0.089422114 = sum of:
    0.014565565 = weight(_text_:information in 339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014565565 = score(doc=339,freq=36.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.16457605 = fieldWeight in 339, product of:
          6.0 = tf(freq=36.0), with freq of:
            36.0 = termFreq=36.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=339)
    0.06259242 = weight(_text_:standards in 339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06259242 = score(doc=339,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.27855965 = fieldWeight in 339, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=339)
    0.012264134 = product of:
      0.024528269 = sum of:
        0.024528269 = weight(_text_:organization in 339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024528269 = score(doc=339,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.13645788 = fieldWeight in 339, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=339)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)
    Content
    What is metadata? - Metadata schemas & their relationships to particular communities - Library and information-related metadata schemas - Creating library metadata for monographic materials - Creating library metadata for continuing materials - Integrating library metadata into local cataloging and bibliographic - databases - Digital collections/digital libraries - Archiving & preserving digital materials - Impact of digital resources on library services - Future possibilities
    Footnote
    Rez. in: JASIST. 58(2007) no.6., S.909-910 (A.D. Petrou): "A division in metadata definitions for physical objects vs. those for digital resources offered in Chapter 1 is punctuated by the use of broader, more inclusive metadata definitions, such as data about data as well as with the inclusion of more specific metadata definitions intended for networked resources. Intertwined with the book's subject matter, which is to "distinguish traditional cataloguing from metadata activity" (5), the authors' chosen metadata definition is also detailed on page 5 as follows: Thus while granting the validity of the inclusive definition, we concentrate primarily on metadata as it is most commonly thought of both inside and outside of the library community, as "structured information used to find, access, use and manage information resources primarily in a digital environment." (International Encyclopedia of Information and Library Science, 2003) Metadata principles discussed by the authors include modularity, extensibility, refinement and multilingualism. The latter set is followed by seven misconceptions about metadata. Two types of metadata discussed are automatically generated indexes and manually created records. In terms of categories of metadata, the authors present three sets of them as follows: descriptive, structural, and administrative metadata. Chapter 2 focuses on metadata for communities of practice, and is a prelude to content in Chapter 3 where metadata applications, use, and development are presented from the perspective of libraries. Chapter 2 discusses the emergence and impact of metadata on organization and access of online resources from the perspective of communities for which such standards exist and for the need for mapping one standard to another. Discussion focuses on metalanguages, such as Standard Generalized Markup Language (SGML) and eXtensible Markup Language (XML), "capable of embedding descriptive elements within the document markup itself' (25). This discussion falls under syntactic interoperability. For semantic interoperability, HTML and other mark-up languages, such as Text Encoding Initiative (TEI) and Computer Interchange of Museum Information (CIMI), are covered. For structural interoperability, Dublin Core's 15 metadata elements are grouped into three areas: content (title, subject, description, type, source, relation, and coverage), intellectual property (creator, publisher, contributor and rights), and instantiation (date, format, identifier, and language) for discussion.
    Other selected specialized metadata element sets or schemas, such as Government Information Locator Service (GILS), are presented. Attention is brought to the different sets of elements and the need for linking up these elements across metadata schemes from a semantic point of view. It is no surprise, then, that after the presentation of additional specialized sets of metadata from the educational community and the arts sector, attention is turned to the discussion of Crosswalks between metadata element sets or the mapping of one metadata standard to another. Finally, the five appendices detailing elements found in Dublin Core, GILS, ARIADNE versions 3 and 3. 1, and Categories for the Description of Works of Art are an excellent addition to this chapter's focus on metadata and communities of practice. Chapters 3-6 provide an up-to-date account of the use of metadata standards in Libraries from the point of view of a community of practice. Some of the content standards included in these four chapters are AACR2, Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC), and Library of Congress Subject Classification. In addition, uses of MARC along with planned implementations of the archival community's encoding scheme, EAD, are covered in detail. In a way, content in these chapters can be considered as a refresher course on the history, current state, importance, and usefulness of the above-mentioned standards in Libraries. Application of the standards is offered for various types of materials, such as monographic materials, continuing resources, and integrating library metadata into local catalogs and databases. A review of current digital library projects takes place in Chapter 7. While details about these projects tend to become out of date fast, the sections on issues and problems encountered in digital projects and successes and failures deserve any reader's close inspection. A suggested model is important enough to merit a specific mention below, in a short list format, as it encapsulates lessons learned from issues, problems, successes, and failures in digital projects. Before detailing the model, however, the various projects included in Chapter 7 should be mentioned. The projects are: Colorado Digitization Project, Cooperative Online Resource Catalog (an Office of Research project by OCLC, Inc.), California Digital Library, JSTOR, LC's National Digital Library Program and VARIATIONS.
    Chapter 8 discusses issues of archiving and preserving digital materials. The chapter reiterates, "What is the point of all of this if the resources identified and catalogued are not preserved?" (Gorman, 2003, p. 16). Discussion about preservation and related issues is organized in five sections that successively ask why, what, who, how, and how much of the plethora of digital materials should be archived and preserved. These are not easy questions because of media instability and technological obsolescence. Stakeholders in communities with diverse interests compete in terms of which community or representative of a community has an authoritative say in what and how much get archived and preserved. In discussing the above-mentioned questions, the authors once again provide valuable information and lessons from a number of initiatives in Europe, Australia, and from other global initiatives. The Draft Charter on the Preservation of the Digital Heritage and the Guidelines for the Preservation of Digital Heritage, both published by UNESCO, are discussed and some of the preservation principles from the Guidelines are listed. The existing diversity in administrative arrangements for these new projects and resources notwithstanding, the impact on content produced for online reserves through work done in digital projects and from the use of metadata and the impact on levels of reference services and the ensuing need for different models to train users and staff is undeniable. In terms of education and training, formal coursework, continuing education, and informal and on-the-job training are just some of the available options. The intensity in resources required for cataloguing digital materials, the questions over the quality of digital resources, and the threat of the new digital environment to the survival of the traditional library are all issues quoted by critics and others, however, who are concerned about a balance for planning and resources allocated for traditional or print-based resources and newer digital resources. A number of questions are asked as part of the book's conclusions in Chapter 10. Of these questions, one that touches on all of the rest and upon much of the book's content is the question: What does the future hold for metadata in libraries? Metadata standards are alive and well in many communities of practice, as Chapters 2-6 have demonstrated. The usefulness of metadata continues to be high and innovation in various elements should keep information professionals engaged for decades to come. There is no doubt that metadata have had a tremendous impact in how we organize information for access and in terms of who, how, when, and where contact is made with library services and collections online. Planning and commitment to a diversity of metadata to serve the plethora of needs in communities of practice are paramount for the continued success of many digital projects and for online preservation of our digital heritage."
    LCSH
    Information organization
    Cataloging / Standards
    Cataloging of electronic information resources
    Information storage and retrieval systems
    Electronic information resources / Management
    Series
    Library and information science text series
    Subject
    Information organization
    Cataloging / Standards
    Cataloging of electronic information resources
    Information storage and retrieval systems
    Electronic information resources / Management
  15. Petrucciani, A.: ¬The other half of cataloguing : new models and perspectives for the control of authors and works (2004) 0.06 
    0.06387309 = product of:
  0.08516412 = sum of:
    0.01213797 = weight(_text_:information in 5669) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01213797 = score(doc=5669,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 5669, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5669)
    0.0553244 = weight(_text_:standards in 5669) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0553244 = score(doc=5669,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.24621427 = fieldWeight in 5669, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5669)
    0.017701752 = product of:
      0.035403505 = sum of:
        0.035403505 = weight(_text_:organization in 5669) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035403505 = score(doc=5669,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.19695997 = fieldWeight in 5669, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5669)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)
    Abstract
    Today's electronic catalogue makes retrieval of specific records very simple and quick in most (not all) cases, but searches aimed at the reliable retrieval of all material answering a well-defined need (author, work, theme, form, etc.) are still long and tiring, and sometimes impossible, in crowded bibliographic databases. In spite of its great relevance, authority control has been and still is the "poor relative" of cataloguing, the often neglected or overlooked "other half" if we compare it to the creation of bibliographic records. The FRBR study and the new authority control standards (GARR and UNIMARC Authorities) are important steps towards future perspectives. Even today, cataloguing codes do not make clear the difference between the access points for bibliographic records and the relationships (work-to-work, author-to-work, etc.) that are independent from spoecific publications. With the development of richer authority records and relationships, the bibliographic record might be relieved of information related to entities different from publications and of all the functions more suitably worked out upstream or downstream in access systems or by links to the images and/or the texts of the publications themselves. A "light" bibliographic record would no longer be the paramount component of library information systems; it would keep its central role rather as nimble, swift turntable between access and content organization systems and systems for management and display of digital resources themselves.
  16. Hsieh-Yee, I.: Cataloging and metatdata education in North American LIS programs (2004) 0.06 
    0.060737852 = product of:
  0.0809838 = sum of:
    0.008582841 = weight(_text_:information in 138) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008582841 = score(doc=138,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 138, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=138)
    0.0553244 = weight(_text_:standards in 138) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0553244 = score(doc=138,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.24621427 = fieldWeight in 138, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=138)
    0.01707656 = product of:
      0.03415312 = sum of:
        0.03415312 = weight(_text_:22 in 138) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03415312 = score(doc=138,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 138, 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=138)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)
    Abstract
    This paper presents findings of a survey an the state of cataloging and metadata education. in ALA-accredited library and information science progranis in North America. The survey was conducted in response to Action Item 5.1 of the "Bibliographic Control of Web Resources: A Library of Congress Action Plan," which focuses an providing metadata education to new LIS professionals. The study found LIS programs increased their reliance an introductory courses to cover cataloging and metadata, but fewer programs than before had a cataloging course requirement. The knowledge of cataloging delivered in introductory courses was basic, and the coverage of metadata was limited to an overview. Cataloging courses showed similarity in coverage and practice and focused an print mater!als. Few cataloging educators provided exercises in metadata record creation using non-AACR standards. Advanced cataloging courses provided in-depth coverage of subject cataloging and the cataloging of nonbook resources, but offered very limited coverage of metadata. Few programs offered full courses an metadata, and even fewer offered advanced metadata courses. Metadata topics were well integrated into LIS curricula, but coverage of metadata courses varied from program to program, depending an the interests of instructors. Educators were forward-looking and agreed an the inclusion of specific knowledge and skills in metadata instruction. A series of actions were proposed to assist educators in providing students with competencies in cataloging and metadata.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  17. Gömpel, R.; Altenhöner, R.; Kunz, M.; Oehlschläger, S.; Werner, C.: Weltkongress Bibliothek und Information, 70. IFLA-Generalkonferenz in Buenos Aires : Aus den Veranstaltungen der Division IV Bibliographic Control, der Core Activities ICABS und UNIMARC sowie der Information Technology Section (2004) 0.06 
    0.058374356 = product of:
  0.077832475 = sum of:
    0.008409433 = weight(_text_:information in 2874) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.008409433 = score(doc=2874,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.09501803 = fieldWeight in 2874, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2874)
    0.06259242 = weight(_text_:standards in 2874) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06259242 = score(doc=2874,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.27855965 = fieldWeight in 2874, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2874)
    0.0068306234 = product of:
      0.013661247 = sum of:
        0.013661247 = weight(_text_:22 in 2874) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013661247 = score(doc=2874,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.07738023 = fieldWeight in 2874, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2874)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)
    Abstract
    "Libraries: Tools for Education and Development" war das Motto der 70. IFLA-Generalkonferenz, dem Weltkongress Bibliothek und Information, der vom 22.-27. August 2004 in Buenos Aires, Argentinien, und damit erstmals in Lateinamerika stattfand. Rund 3.000 Teilnehmerinnen und Teilnehmer, davon ein Drittel aus spanischsprachigen Ländern, allein 600 aus Argentinien, besuchten die von der IFLA und dem nationalen Organisationskomitee gut organisierte Tagung mit mehr als 200 Sitzungen und Veranstaltungen. Aus Deutschland waren laut Teilnehmerverzeichnis leider nur 45 Kolleginnen und Kollegen angereist, womit ihre Zahl wieder auf das Niveau von Boston gesunken ist. Erfreulicherweise gab es nunmehr bereits im dritten Jahr eine deutschsprachige Ausgabe des IFLA-Express. Auch in diesem Jahr soll hier über die Veranstaltungen der Division IV Bibliographic Control berichtet werden. Die Arbeit der Division mit ihren Sektionen Bibliography, Cataloguing, Classification and Indexing sowie der neuen Sektion Knowledge Management bildet einen der Schwerpunkte der IFLA-Arbeit, die dabei erzielten konkreten Ergebnisse und Empfehlungen haben maßgeblichen Einfluss auf die tägliche Arbeit der Bibliothekarinnen und Bibliothekare. Erstmals wird auch ausführlich über die Arbeit der Core Activities ICABS und UNIMARC und der Information Technology Section berichtet.
    Content
    Bibliography Section (Sektion Bibliographie) Die Sektion befasst sich mit Inhalt, Aufbau, Produktion, Verteilung und Erhaltung von bibliographischen Informationen, in erster Linie, aber nicht ausschließlich bezogen auf Nationalbibliographien. Sie fördert die "Universal Bibliographic Control (UBC)" durch die Verbreitung von Standards und praktischen Anwendungsbeispielen.
    Cataloguing Section (Sektion Katalogisierung) Der Schwerpunkt der Arbeit dieser Sektion liegt auf der Erarbeitung bzw. internationalen Harmonisierung von Strukturen, Regeln und Arbeitsverfahren mit dem Ziel, die internationale Kooperation im Katalogisierungsbereich zu verbessern. In Anbetracht des laufenden Evaluierungsprozesses wurde der Strategieplan der Sektion zum jetzigen Zeitpunkt nur dort aktualisiert, wo es unbedingt erforderlich war. Neue Ziele wurden nicht aufgenommen. Oberste Priorität bei den strategischen Zielen behielt die Entwicklung internationaler Katalogisierungsstandards für die bibliographische Beschreibung und den Zugriff. In ihrer zentralen Bedeutung bestätigt wurden auch die "Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records" (FRBR). Darüber hinaus gehört auch in Zukunft die Weiterentwicklung und Revision der ISBDs zu den zentralen Anliegen der Arbeit der Sektion Katalogisierung. Ein weiteres vorrangiges Ziel bleibt die Erarbeitung von Standards, Regeln und Informationslisten, um den Zugang zu bibliographischen Daten in allen Sprachen zu ermöglichen. Hierzu zählen u. a.: - die vollständige Veröffentlichung der Anonymous Classics: Der Teil für europäische Literatur ist inzwischen veröffentlicht'. Für die Erarbeitung weiterer Teile (Lateinamerika, Afrika und Asien) soll das Verfahren gestrafft und ein Zeitplan erstellt werden. - die Beobachtung der Aktivitäten zu Unicode und die Information der Sektionsmitglieder darüber zur Förderung des mehrsprachigen Zugangs zu bibliographischer Information - die Entwicklung eines web-basierten multilingualen Wörterbuchs für Katalogisierungsbegriffe - die Entwicklung und der Test von (Daten-)Modellen für eine virtuelle internationale Normdatei - die Überarbeitung der "IFLA Names of persons". Das Open Programme der Sektion stand in diesem Jahr unter dem Motto "Developments in Cataloguing Guidelines" und wurde von Barbara Tillett, Lynne Howarth und Carol van Nuys bestritten. Lynne Howarth ging in ihrem Vortrag "Enabling metadata: creating a core record for resource discovery" auf die Reaktionen im weltweiten Stellungnahmeverfahren auf die Veröffentlichung des Papiers "Guidance an the Structure, Content and Application of Metadata Records for digital resources and collections" der Working Group an the Use of Metadata Schemes ein. Carol van Nuys stellte das norwegische "Paradigma Project and its quest for metadata solutions and services" vor.
    Classification and Indexing Section (Sektion Klassifikation und Indexierung) Die Working Group an Guidelines for Multilingual Thesauri hat ihre Arbeit abgeschlossen, die Richtlinien werden Ende 2004 im IFLAnet zur Verfügung stehen. Die 2003 ins Leben gerufene Arbeitsgruppe zu Mindeststandards der Inhaltserschließung in Nationalbibliographien hat sich in Absprache mit den Mitgliedern des Standing Committee auf den Namen "Guidelines for minimal requirements for subject access by national bibliographic agencies" verständigt. Als Grundlage der zukünftigen Arbeit soll der "Survey an Subject Heading Languages Used in National Libraries and Bibliographies" von Magda HeinerFreiling dienen. Davon ausgehend soll eruiert werden, welche Arten von Medienwerken mit welchen Instrumentarien und in welcher Tiefe erschlossen werden. Eine weitere Arbeitsgruppe der Sektion befasst sich mit dem sachlichen Zugriff auf Netzpublikationen (Working Group an Subject Access to Web Resources). Die Veranstaltung "Implementation and adaption of global tools for subject access to local needs" fand regen Zuspruch. Drei Vortragende zeigten auf, wie in ihrem Sprachgebiet die Subject Headings der Library of Congress (LoC) übernommen werden (Development of a Spanish subject heading list und Subject indexing in Sweden) bzw. wie sich die Zusammenarbeit mit der LoC gestalten lässt, um den besonderen terminologischen Bedürfnissen eines Sprach- und Kulturraums außerhalb der USA Rechnung zu tragen (The SACO Program in Latin America). Aus deutscher Sicht verdiente der Vortrag "Subject indexing between international standards and local context - the Italian case" besondere Beachtung. Die Entwicklung eines Regelwerks zur verbalen Sacherschließung und die Erarbeitung einer italienischen Schlagwortnormdatei folgen nämlich erklärtermaßen der deutschen Vorgehensweise mit RSWK und SWD.
    Knowledge Management Section (Sektion Wissensmanagement) Ziel der neuen Sektion ist es, die Entwicklung und Implementierung des Wissensmanagements in Bibliotheken und Informationszentren zu fördern. Die Sektion will dafür eine internationale Plattform für die professionelle Kommunikation bieten und damit das Thema bekannter und allgemein verständlicher machen. Auf diese Weise soll seine Bedeutung auch für Bibliotheken und die mit ihm arbeitenden Einrichtungen herausgestellt werden. IFLA-CDNL Alliance for Bibliographic Standards (ICABS) Ein Jahr nach ihrer Gründung in Berlin hat die IFLA Core Activity "IFLA-CDNL Alliance for Bibliographic Standards (ICABS)" in Buenos Aires zum ersten Mal das Spektrum ihrer Arbeitsfelder einem großen Fachpublikum vorgestellt. Die IFLA Core Activity UNIMARC, einer der Partner der Allianz, hatte am Donnerstagvormittag zu einer Veranstaltung unter dem Titel "The holdings record as a bibliographic control tool" geladen. Am Nachmittag des selben Tages fand unter dem Titel "The new IFLA-CDNL Alliance for Bibliographic Standards - umbrella for multifaceted activities: strategies and practical ways to improve international coordination" die umfassende ICABS-Veranstaltung statt, die von der Generaldirektorin Der Deutschen Bibliothek, Dr. Elisabeth Niggemann, moderiert wurde. Nachdem die Vorsitzende des Advisory Board in ihrem Vortrag auf die Entstehungsgeschichte der Allianz eingegangen war, gab sie einen kurzen Oberblick über die Organisation und die Arbeit von ICABS als Dach der vielfältigen Aktivitäten im Bereich bibliographischer Standards. Vertreter aller in ICABS zusammengeschlossener Bibliotheken stellten im Anschluss daran ihre Arbeitsbereiche und -ergebnisse vor.
    Projekt "Mapping ISBDs to FRBR" Die Deutsche Bibliothek und die British Library haben im Rahmen ihrer jeweiligen Zuständigkeiten innerhalb von ICABS gemeinsam das Projekt "Mapping ISBDs to FRBR" finanziert. Beide Bibliotheken unterstützen damit die strategischen Ziele der IFLA-CDNL Allianz für bibliographische Standards. Die Deutsche Bibliothek ist innerhalb der Allianz verantwortlich für die Unterstützung der Pflege und Weiterentwicklung der ISBD, während die British Library für die Unterstützung von Pflege und Entwicklung der FRBR zuständig ist. Für die Durchführung des Projekts konnte Tom Delsey gewonnen werden, der federführender Autor der FRBR ist und Beiträge zu vielen verschiedenen Aspekten der ISBDs geliefert hat. Das Ergebnis seiner Arbeit "Mapping ISBD Elements to FRBR Entity Attributes and Relationships" steht im IFLAnet zur VerFügung (http://www.ifla.org/VII/s13/pubs/ISBD-FRBR-mappingFinal.pdf).
  18. Madison, O.M.A.: ¬The IFLA Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records : international standards for bibliographic control (2000) 0.06 
    0.056450624 = product of:
  0.11290125 = sum of:
    0.09582469 = weight(_text_:standards in 187) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09582469 = score(doc=187,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.42645568 = fieldWeight in 187, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=187)
    0.01707656 = product of:
      0.03415312 = sum of:
        0.03415312 = weight(_text_:22 in 187) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03415312 = score(doc=187,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050415643 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 187, 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=187)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    The formal charge for the IFLA study involving international bibliography standards was to delineate the functions that are performed by the bibliographic record with respect to various media, applications, and user needs. The method used was the entity relationship analysis technique. Three groups of entities that are the key objects of interest to users of bibliographic records were defined. The primary group contains four entities: work, expression, manifestation, and item. The second group includes entities responsible for the intellectual or artistic content, production, or ownership of entities in the first group. The third group includes entities that represent concepts, objects, events, and places. In the study we identified the attributes associated with each entity and the relationships that are most important to users. The attributes and relationships were mapped to the functional requirements for bibliographic records that were defined in terms of four user tasks: to find, identify, select, and obtain. Basic requirements for national bibliographic records were recommended based on the entity analysis. The recommendations of the study are compared with two standards, AACR (Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules) and the Dublin Core, to place them into pragmatic context. The results of the study are being used in the review of the complete set of ISBDs as the initial benchmark in determining data elements for each format.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  19. Oehlschläger, S.: IFLA-CDNL Allianz für bibliografische Standards (ICABS) (2004) 0.06 
    0.056349926 = product of:
  0.11269985 = sum of:
    0.013732546 = weight(_text_:information in 2190) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013732546 = score(doc=2190,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.1551638 = fieldWeight in 2190, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2190)
    0.09896731 = weight(_text_:standards in 2190) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09896731 = score(doc=2190,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.22470023 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.4404415 = fieldWeight in 2190, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          4.4569545 = idf(docFreq=1393, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2190)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Im August 2003 wurde eine neue Allianz zwischen der IFLA und den Nationalbibliotheken vereinbart, um die Koordinierungsarbeit fortzusetzen und auszubauen, die zuvor von den Geschäftsstellen der IFLA Core Programs UBCIM und UDT geleistet wurde. Die IFLA Core Activity Universal Bibliographic Control and International Marc (UBCIM) wurde vor 30 Jahren gegründet und endete 2003. Der Zweck von UBCIM war es, Aktivitäten zu koordinieren, die auf die Entwicklung von Systemen und Standards für die bibliografische Kontrolle auf nationaler Ebene und den internationalen Austausch von bibliografischen Standards abzielten, einschließlich der Unterstützung fachlicher Aktivitäten von Sections und Divisions der IFLA (z. B. der Division Bibliographic Control und den Sections Information Technology und National Libraries). Darüber hinaus sorgte UBCIM für die Veröffentlichung von Berichten über Projekte, die im Zusammenhang mit internationalen bibliografischen Standards und Formaten stehen sowie für die Veröffentlichung von Proceedings von themenbezogenen Konferenzen und Seminaren. UBCIM war ursprünglich bei der British Library angesiedelt (1973 - 1989) und danach von 1990 bis Anfang 2003 bei Der Deutschen Bibliothek. Anfang 2003 hat die Biblioteca Nacional de Portugal die Verantwortung sowohl für UNIMARC als auch für ICBC (International Cataloguing and Bibliographic Control, eine Quartalszeitschrift von IFLA, zuvor von UBCIM) übernommen.
    Als weiterer Bestandteil des neuen Programms wurde ein Großteil des Programms der früheren Core Activity Universal Dataflow and Telecommunications (UDT) übernommen. UDT unterstützte die Analyse und die Förderung von Technologien und Standards, sofern sie der Interoperabilität dienen und sich auf die digitale Umgebung im Bereich der vernetzten Suche von Ressourcen, des Information Retrieval, der Digitalisierung und Metadaten beziehen. UDT arbeitete verbandsweit mit den Sections und Programmes der IFLA zusammen, unterstützte aber besonders die fachlichen Aktivitäten der Information Technology Section. Von seinen Anfängen in den späten 80er-Jahren bis zu seiner Schließung war das Programm an der National Library of Canada (NLC) angesiedelt. UDT entwickelte und pflegte später auch das erste Kommunikationstool der IFLA, IFLANET, das viele Jahre an der NLC gehostet wurde. IFLANET wurde zum Institut de ['Information Scientifique et Technique (INIST) in Frankreich transferiert und ist nicht Bestandteil von ICABS.
  20. Letarte, K.M.; Turvey, M.R.; Bornemann, D.; Adams, D.L.: Practitioner perspectives on cataloging education for entry-level academic Librarians (2002) 0.05 
    0.05469762 = product of:
  0.10939524 = sum of:
    0.012015978 = weight(_text_:information in 158) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012015978 = score(doc=158,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.08850355 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050415643 = queryNorm
        0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 158, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=158)
    0.09737927 = sum of:
      0.049564905 = weight(_text_:organization in 158) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.049564905 = score(doc=158,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17974974 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050415643 = queryNorm
          0.27574396 = fieldWeight in 158, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5653565 = idf(docFreq=3399, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=158)
      0.047814365 = weight(_text_:22 in 158) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.047814365 = score(doc=158,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17654699 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050415643 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 158, 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=158)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    The role of cataloging education within the library profession is a topic of considerable interest and debate. Fifty-five heads of reference and sixty-five heads of cataloging in Association of Research Librarians institutions responded to a survey based upon the Association for Library Collections and Technical Services Educational Policy Statement, Appendix: Knowledge and Skills, Intellectual Access and Information Organization, concerning the importance of cataloging competencies for all entry-level academic librarians. The survey found that practitioners agreed upon a definite set of core cataloging competencies that all entry-level academic librarians should possess. This finding holds larger implications for library education for academic librarians and for the profession as a whole.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22

Authors

Languages

  • e 247
  • d 58
  • es 2
  • f 2
  • a 1
  • chi 1
  • s 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 283
  • m 19
  • b 12
  • el 11
  • s 10
  • r 4
  • p 1
  • x 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications