Search (83 results, page 1 of 5)

0.038986538 = product of:
  0.09746634 = sum of:
    0.077693805 = product of:
      0.15538761 = sum of:
        0.15538761 = weight(_text_:problems in 132) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15538761 = score(doc=132,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            1.0318688 = fieldWeight in 132, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=132)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.019772539 = product of:
      0.039545078 = sum of:
        0.039545078 = weight(_text_:22 in 132) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039545078 = score(doc=132,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 132, 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=132)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

This paper surveys the cataloging literature to collect problems that have been identified with the MARC 21 format. The problems are sorted into (1) problems that are not the fault of MARC 21; (2) problems that perhaps are not problems at all; (3) problems that are connected with the current shared cataloging environment; and 4) other problems with MARC 21 and vendor implementation of it. The author makes recommendations to deal with the true MARC 21 problems that remain after this analysis.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.023447776 = product of:
  0.05861944 = sum of:
    0.038846903 = product of:
      0.077693805 = sum of:
        0.077693805 = weight(_text_:problems in 873) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.077693805 = score(doc=873,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.5159344 = fieldWeight in 873, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=873)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.019772539 = product of:
      0.039545078 = sum of:
        0.039545078 = weight(_text_:22 in 873) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039545078 = score(doc=873,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 873, 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=873)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

The British Library have conformed their decision to go ahead with the harmonization programme between the US and UKMARC formats, and although the final date for the changeover is still not yet, they expect the whole process to be over in 2 years, with one further year after that when they will support UKMARC. Describes the progress made so far, and problems that remain to be solved

Source

LASER link. 1997, Spring/Summer, S.22-24

0.023383325 = product of:
  0.05845831 = sum of:
    0.03399104 = product of:
      0.06798208 = sum of:
        0.06798208 = weight(_text_:problems in 5100) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06798208 = score(doc=5100,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.4514426 = fieldWeight in 5100, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5100)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.02446727 = product of:
      0.04893454 = sum of:
        0.04893454 = weight(_text_:22 in 5100) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04893454 = score(doc=5100,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.38301262 = fieldWeight in 5100, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5100)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

Briefly summarizes the problems encountered when attempting to use the USMARC cataloguing format in US school libraries and describes the development of CEMARC format by the Northwest Ohio Educational Technology Foundation (NWOET), which addresses the main problems by: offering sata entry guidelines for a minimum USMARC standard in order to clarify inconsistencies in application; and by suggesting enhancements and new fields that go beyond the USMARC standard. Concludes with brief notes on early CEMARC implementation

Date

11. 9.1996 19:22:20

Source

Literacy: traditional, cultural, technological. Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Conference of the International Association of School Librarianship (selected papers), Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, Pittsburgh University, School of Library and Information Science, 17-22 Jul 94

0.0221726 = product of:
  0.0554315 = sum of:
    0.027468907 = product of:
      0.054937813 = sum of:
        0.054937813 = weight(_text_:problems in 2408) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.054937813 = score(doc=2408,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.36482072 = fieldWeight in 2408, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2408)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.027962593 = product of:
      0.055925187 = sum of:
        0.055925187 = weight(_text_:22 in 2408) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.055925187 = score(doc=2408,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.4377287 = fieldWeight in 2408, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2408)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

This paper discuesses the goals and outcome of the OCLC/NCSA Metadata Workshop held March 1-3, 1995 in Dublin Ohio. The resulting proposed "Dublin Core" Metadata Elements Set is described briefly. An attempt is made to map the Dublin Core data elements to USMARC; problems and outstanding questions are noted.

Date

13. 1.2007 18:31:22

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 22(1996) nos.3/4, S.43-58

0.014172435 = product of:
  0.035431087 = sum of:
    0.02060168 = product of:
      0.04120336 = sum of:
        0.04120336 = weight(_text_:problems in 302) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04120336 = score(doc=302,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.27361554 = fieldWeight in 302, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=302)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.014829405 = product of:
      0.02965881 = sum of:
        0.02965881 = weight(_text_:22 in 302) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02965881 = score(doc=302,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 302, 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=302)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

Machine-Readable Cataloging (MARC) is currently the most broadly used bibliographic standard for encoding and exchanging bibliographic data. However, MARC may not fully support representation of the dynamic nature and semantics of digital resources because of its rigid and single-layered linear structure. The Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) model, which is designed to overcome the problems of MARC, does not provide sufficient data elements and adopts a predetermined hierarchy. A flexible structure for bibliographic data with detailed data elements is needed. Integrating MARC format with the hierarchical structure of FRBR is one approach to meet this need. The purpose of this research is to propose an approach that can facilitate interoperability between MARC and FRBR by providing a conceptual structure that can function as a mediator between MARC data elements and FRBR attributes.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.011810362 = product of:
  0.029525906 = sum of:
    0.017168067 = product of:
      0.034336135 = sum of:
        0.034336135 = weight(_text_:problems in 154) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034336135 = score(doc=154,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.22801295 = fieldWeight in 154, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=154)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.0123578375 = product of:
      0.024715675 = sum of:
        0.024715675 = weight(_text_:22 in 154) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024715675 = score(doc=154,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 154, 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=154)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)

Abstract

Encoded Archival Description (EAD) has provided a new way to approach manuscript and archival collection representation. A review of previous representational practices and problems highlights the benefits of using EAD. This new approach should be considered a partner rather than an adversary in the access providing process. Technological capabilities now allow for multiple metadata schemas to be employed in the creation of the finding aid. Crosswalks allow for MARC records to be generated from the detailed encoding of an EAD finding aid. In the process of creating these crosswalks and detailed encoding, EAD has generated more changes in traditional processes and procedures than originally imagined. The North Carolina State University (NCSU) Libraries sought to test the process of crosswalking EAD to MARC, investigating how this process used technology as well as changed physical procedures. By creating a complex and indepth EAD template for finding aids, with accompanying related encoding analogs embedded within the element structure, MARC records were generated that required minor editing and revision for inclusion in the NCSU Libraries OPAC. The creation of this bridge between EAD and MARC has stimulated theoretical discussions about the role of collaboration, technology, and expertise in the ongoing struggle to maximize access to our collections. While this study is a only a first attempt at harnessing this potential, a presentation of the tensions, struggles, and successes provides illumination to some of the larger issues facing special collections today.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.009461033 = product of:
  0.047305163 = sum of:
    0.047305163 = product of:
      0.094610326 = sum of:
        0.094610326 = weight(_text_:etc in 4608) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.094610326 = score(doc=4608,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19761753 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.4164915 = idf(docFreq=533, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.47875473 = fieldWeight in 4608, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.4164915 = idf(docFreq=533, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4608)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Diplomarbeit at the University of Saarbrücken which contains the following topics: data exchange format; terminology management systems; terminological databases; terminological record; data elements; data categories; data fields, etc.: hard- and software-related difficulties for the structure of records; description of approaches for the development of an exchange format for terminological data (MATER, MicroMATER, NTRF, SGML); considerations concerning an SGML-like exchange format; perspectives

0.009461033 = product of:
  0.047305163 = sum of:
    0.047305163 = product of:
      0.094610326 = sum of:
        0.094610326 = weight(_text_:etc in 4689) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.094610326 = score(doc=4689,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19761753 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.4164915 = idf(docFreq=533, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.47875473 = fieldWeight in 4689, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.4164915 = idf(docFreq=533, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4689)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Text of a document produced by the French Librarians Association, Federation of Library Software Users and the Association of Directors of Departmental Lending Libraries, setting out standards for local data included in bibliographic notices in UNIMARC format. These are specifically intended for loan copies sent from central to branch libraries, for integration into the local catalogue. The subfields (MARC field 995) are: origin of document; bar code; classification code and loan details; details of contents, support etc; and notes on physical features

0.009461033 = product of:
  0.047305163 = sum of:
    0.047305163 = product of:
      0.094610326 = sum of:
        0.094610326 = weight(_text_:etc in 122) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.094610326 = score(doc=122,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19761753 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.4164915 = idf(docFreq=533, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.47875473 = fieldWeight in 122, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.4164915 = idf(docFreq=533, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=122)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

In 2015, the PCC Task Group on URIs in MARC was tasked to identify and address linked data identifiers deployment in the current MARC format. By way of a pilot test, a survey, MARC Discussion papers, Proposals, etc., the Task Group initiated and introduced changes to MARC encoding. The Task Group succeeded in laying the ground work for preparing library data transition from MARC data to a linked data, RDF environment.

0.008388779 = product of:
  0.041943893 = sum of:
    0.041943893 = product of:
      0.083887786 = sum of:
        0.083887786 = weight(_text_:22 in 5743) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.083887786 = score(doc=5743,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.6565931 = fieldWeight in 5743, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=5743)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

30. 3.2002 19:45:22

Source

Revista Española de Documentaçion Cientifica. 22(1999) no.2, S.198-219

0.007909016 = product of:
  0.039545078 = sum of:
    0.039545078 = product of:
      0.079090156 = sum of:
        0.079090156 = weight(_text_:22 in 2840) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.079090156 = score(doc=2840,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 2840, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=2840)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Source

Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1

0.007095774 = product of:
  0.03547887 = sum of:
    0.03547887 = product of:
      0.07095774 = sum of:
        0.07095774 = weight(_text_:etc in 636) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07095774 = score(doc=636,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19761753 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.4164915 = idf(docFreq=533, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.35906604 = fieldWeight in 636, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.4164915 = idf(docFreq=533, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=636)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Zu den bestbesuchten Veranstaltungen des diesjährigen Bibliothekartages in Augsburg gehörte die Diskussion um die Reform der Formalerschließung. Ganz offensichtlich spielt die Katalogisierung - trotz Internet, Digitalisierung, Dublin Core etc. - im täglichen Geschäft nach wie vor eine bedeutende Rolle. Die Debatte um Regelwerke und Datenformate wird jedenfalls mit großem Ernst und Engagement geführt. Doch die Diskussion droht mittlerweile unübersichtlich zu werden, fachliche Argumente, technische Erfordernisse und bibliothekspolitische Positionen gehen munter durcheinander.

0.0069203894 = product of:
  0.034601945 = sum of:
    0.034601945 = product of:
      0.06920389 = sum of:
        0.06920389 = weight(_text_:22 in 7196) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06920389 = score(doc=7196,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 7196, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=7196)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Source

Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1

0.0069203894 = product of:
  0.034601945 = sum of:
    0.034601945 = product of:
      0.06920389 = sum of:
        0.06920389 = weight(_text_:22 in 4973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06920389 = score(doc=4973,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 4973, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4973)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

26. 8.2000 19:22:35

0.0069203894 = product of:
  0.034601945 = sum of:
    0.034601945 = product of:
      0.06920389 = sum of:
        0.06920389 = weight(_text_:22 in 6838) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06920389 = score(doc=6838,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 6838, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6838)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Source

Dialog mit Bibliotheken. 13(2001) H.3, S.20-22

0.0069203894 = product of:
  0.034601945 = sum of:
    0.034601945 = product of:
      0.06920389 = sum of:
        0.06920389 = weight(_text_:22 in 2841) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06920389 = score(doc=2841,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 2841, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2841)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Source

Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2

0.006867227 = product of:
  0.034336135 = sum of:
    0.034336135 = product of:
      0.06867227 = sum of:
        0.06867227 = weight(_text_:problems in 663) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06867227 = score(doc=663,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.4560259 = fieldWeight in 663, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=663)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Outlines some goals which format integration has achieved, and also some new problems which it brings. Cataloguers therefore have a great deal to consider in formulating policies

0.0067982078 = product of:
  0.03399104 = sum of:
    0.03399104 = product of:
      0.06798208 = sum of:
        0.06798208 = weight(_text_:problems in 3811) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06798208 = score(doc=3811,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.4514426 = fieldWeight in 3811, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3811)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Discusses the problems associated with the requirements for international standards for the exchange of bibliographic records in machine readable form, including the roles of national bibliographies and national libraries; a lack of international cataloguing standards and subject control systems; language difficulties; character sets and codes, and non roman alphabets. Suggests that these problems lie behind the development of various MARC formats out of UNIMARC. In this final part of a 4 part article describes the formats for South Africa, Taiwan, Japan, Croatia and Germany and indicates the points of difference and the influence of local requirements

0.0067982078 = product of:
  0.03399104 = sum of:
    0.03399104 = product of:
      0.06798208 = sum of:
        0.06798208 = weight(_text_:problems in 7191) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06798208 = score(doc=7191,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.15058853 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.4514426 = fieldWeight in 7191, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7191)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Discusses some of the problems associated with the requirements and prospects for international standards for the exchange of bibliographic records in machine readable form, the various roles of national bibliographies and national libraries; the lack of international cataloguing standards and of an international subject control systems; language difficulties; character sets and codes, and non roman alphabets. Explains how these problems lie behind the development of various MARC formats out of UNIMARC. In this final part of a 4 part article describes the formats for South Africa, Taiwan, Japan, Croatia and Germany and indicates the points of difference and the influence of local requirements

0.005931762 = product of:
  0.02965881 = sum of:
    0.02965881 = product of:
      0.05931762 = sum of:
        0.05931762 = weight(_text_:22 in 6077) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05931762 = score(doc=6077,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.12776221 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.036484417 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 6077, 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=6077)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

2. 8.2001 16:22:33