Search (18 results, page 1 of 1)

0.04055674 = product of:
  0.12167022 = sum of:
    0.12167022 = sum of:
      0.07551802 = weight(_text_:librarians in 5479) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07551802 = score(doc=5479,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04866305 = queryNorm
          0.3464393 = fieldWeight in 5479, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5479)
      0.0461522 = weight(_text_:22 in 5479) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0461522 = score(doc=5479,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.04866305 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5479, 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=5479)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

This paper discusses the development of descriptive cataloging from 1830 to 1908 and focuses on the careers of Antonio Panizzi, Charles Coffin Jewett, and Charles Ammi Cutter and the development of the American Library Association (ALA) and the Library Association of the United Kingdom (LAUK). It analyzes the various rules and codes put forth by both Americans and British librarians and the eventual cooperation between the United States and the United Kingdom.

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 35(2002) nos.1/2, S.3-22

0.021756357 = product of:
  0.06526907 = sum of:
    0.06526907 = product of:
      0.13053814 = sum of:
        0.13053814 = weight(_text_:22 in 935) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13053814 = score(doc=935,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.76602525 = fieldWeight in 935, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=935)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

22. 7.2007 12:05:26
22. 7.2007 12:08:24

0.020342594 = product of:
  0.06102778 = sum of:
    0.06102778 = product of:
      0.12205556 = sum of:
        0.12205556 = weight(_text_:librarians in 5661) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.12205556 = score(doc=5661,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.5599305 = fieldWeight in 5661, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5661)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Catalogue compilation and maintenance are time consuming. Developments from the mechanically produced guard catalogue to the OPAC have taken a course different from that which early pioineers might have predicted. Technical developments do not always match librarians' needs. The OPAC provides many retrieval possibilities, assists interlibrary cooperation and is available worldwide but cannot yet completely replace older catalogue forms. Only in the future will librarians realize whether online catalogues are the ideal system

0.017175518 = product of:
  0.051526554 = sum of:
    0.051526554 = product of:
      0.15457965 = sum of:
        0.15457965 = weight(_text_:3a in 7394) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15457965 = score(doc=7394,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.4125659 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.3746787 = fieldWeight in 7394, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=7394)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Ergebnis einer Umfrage aus dem Frühjahr 1993. A. Wissenschaftliche Bibliotheken: Versandt wurde der Fragebogen an die Mitglieder der Sektion IV des DBV. Fragen: (1a) Um welchen Bestand handelt es sich, der sachlich erschlossen wird? (1b) Wie groß ist dieser Bestand? (1c) Wird dieser Bestand vollständig oder nur in Auswahl (einzelne Fächer, Lehrbücher, Dissertationen o.ä.) sachlich erschlossen? (1d) Seit wann bestehen die jetzigen Sachkataloge? (2) Auf welche Art wird der Bestand zur Zeit sachlich erschlossen? (3a) Welche Klassifikation wird angewendet? (3b) Gibt es alphabetisches SyK-Register bzw. einen Zugriff auf die Klassenbeschreibungen? (3c) Gibt es ergänzende Schlüssel für die Aspekte Ort, Zeit, Form? (4) Falls Sie einen SWK führen (a) nach welchem Regelwerk? (b) Gibt es ein genormtes Vokabular oder einen Thesaurus (ggf. nur für bestimmte Fächer)? (5) In welcher Form existieren die Sachkataloge? (6) Ist die Bibliothek an einer kooperativen Sacherschließung, z.B. in einem Verbund beteiligt? [Nein: 79%] (7) Nutzen Sie Fremdleistungen bei der Sacherschließung? [Ja: 46%] (8) Welche sachlichen Suchmöglichkeiten gibt es für Benutzer? (9) Sind zukünftige Veränderungen bei der Sacherschließung geplant? [Ja: 73%]. - B. Öffentliche Bibliotheken: Die Umfrage richtete sich an alle ÖBs der Sektionen I, II und III des DBV. Fragen: (1) Welche Sachkataloge führen Sie? (2) Welche Klassifikationen (Systematiken) liegen dem SyK zugrunde? [ASB: 242; KAB: 333; SfB: 4 (???); SSD: 11; Berliner: 18] (3) Führen Sie ein eigenes Schlagwort-Register zum SyK bzw. zur Klassifikation (Systematik)? (4) Führen Sie den SWK nach ...? [RSWK: 132 (= ca. 60%) anderen Regeln: 93] (5) Seit wann bestehen die jetzigen Sachkataloge? (6) In welcher Form existiern die Sachkataloge? (7) In welchem Umfang wird der Bestand erschlossen? (8) Welche Signaturen verwenden Sie? (9) Ist die Bibliothek an einer kooperativen Sacherschließung, z.B. einem Verbund, beteiligt? [Nein: 96%] (10) Nutzen Sie Fremdleistungen bei der Sacherschließung? [Ja: 70%] (11) Woher beziehen Sie diese Fremdleistungen? (12) Verfügen Sie über ein Online-Katalogsystem mit OPAC? [Ja: 78; Nein: 614] (13) Sind zukünftig Veränderungen bei der Sacherschließung geplant? [Nein: 458; Ja: 237]; RESÜMEE für ÖB: "(i) Einführung von EDV-Katalogen bleibt auch in den 90er Jahren ein Thema, (ii) Der Aufbau von SWK wird in vielen Bibliotheken in Angriff genommen, dabei spielt die Fremddatenübernahme eine entscheidende Rolle, (iii) RSWK werden zunehmend angewandt, Nutzung der SWD auch für andere Regeln wirkt normierend, (iv) Große Bewegung auf dem 'Systematik-Markt' ist in absehbarer Zeit nicht zu erwarten, (v) Für kleinere Bibliotheken wird der Zettelkatalog auf absehbare Zeit noch die herrschende Katalogform sein, (vi) Der erhebliche Nachholbedarf in den neuen Bundesländern wird nur in einem größeren Zeitraum zu leisten sein. ??? SPEZIALBIBIOTHEKEN ???

0.014384385 = product of:
  0.043153156 = sum of:
    0.043153156 = product of:
      0.08630631 = sum of:
        0.08630631 = weight(_text_:librarians in 397) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.08630631 = score(doc=397,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.39593065 = fieldWeight in 397, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=397)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

In 1938 the Catalog Section of the American Library Association (ALA) mailed a questionnaire to approximately 1600 librarians, asking their opinions concerning various problems in cataloging and classification. Many changes have occurred since then, but there are problems cited in 1938 that are still with us in one form or another. The items listed in the questionnaire are discussed, and conclusions drawn as to their pertinence for today.

0.0127141215 = product of:
  0.038142364 = sum of:
    0.038142364 = product of:
      0.07628473 = sum of:
        0.07628473 = weight(_text_:librarians in 5484) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07628473 = score(doc=5484,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.34995657 = fieldWeight in 5484, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5484)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

This article discusses cataloging and classification history in Mexico and how cataloging and classification have evolved according to the changes that libraries and library science have experienced on both a national and international level. The first part of the article refers to the first half of the twentieth century, detailing the origins of cataloging and classification history. The second part presents discussion of the development and consolidation of both cataloging and classification during the second half of the twentieth century. The article also discusses subject headings, automation, centralization, and union catalogs in Mexico. It discusses past difficulties in creating a union catalog at a national level and the advantages of automated systems in helping to develop this needed union catalog. The article discusses the need to resume publication of the Bibliografía Mexicana. One of the main problems that Mexican libraries have faced is a scarcity of librarians adequately prepared to perform cataloging and classification of their collections. This lack of librarians is even more acute in the Mexican states. There are insufficient numbers of students in library schools to provide the staffing that libraries demand not only for cataloguing and classification but also for many other library activities.

0.012586337 = product of:
  0.03775901 = sum of:
    0.03775901 = product of:
      0.07551802 = sum of:
        0.07551802 = weight(_text_:librarians in 575) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07551802 = score(doc=575,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.3464393 = fieldWeight in 575, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=575)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Librarians in the United States always seem to be trying to reduce their costs and share resources through various centralized or cooperative endeavors. Early cooperative cataloging efforts, prior to 1967 when the MARC format made its appearance and automation took off, clearly recognized the need to create a shared national resource of bibliographic records. Yet, the dreams of cataloging it once for all turned into nightmares over and over as many schemes were tried and failed. However, some schemes succeeded and millions of items were cataloged through these early efforts. The promise of our preliminary steps in cooperative cataloging during the pre-automation era sparked our imaginations and raised our hopes for the future.

0.012586337 = product of:
  0.03775901 = sum of:
    0.03775901 = product of:
      0.07551802 = sum of:
        0.07551802 = weight(_text_:librarians in 1677) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07551802 = score(doc=1677,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.3464393 = fieldWeight in 1677, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1677)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

An explanation of where FRBR (Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records) comes from, given by a look at the work of librarians such as Panizzi, Cutter, Ranganathan, and Lubetzky, and an examination of four themes in the history of library cataloging: the use of axioms to explain the purpose of catalogs, the importance of user needs, the idea of the "work," and standardization and internationalization.

0.010988619 = product of:
  0.032965858 = sum of:
    0.032965858 = product of:
      0.065931715 = sum of:
        0.065931715 = weight(_text_:22 in 4056) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.065931715 = score(doc=4056,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 4056, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4056)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Pages

S.3-22

0.010988619 = product of:
  0.032965858 = sum of:
    0.032965858 = product of:
      0.065931715 = sum of:
        0.065931715 = weight(_text_:22 in 4064) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.065931715 = score(doc=4064,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 4064, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4064)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

29. 7.2006 20:06:22

0.01078829 = product of:
  0.032364868 = sum of:
    0.032364868 = product of:
      0.064729735 = sum of:
        0.064729735 = weight(_text_:librarians in 5490) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.064729735 = score(doc=5490,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.296948 = fieldWeight in 5490, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5490)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

In 1943 the Japanese League of Young Librarians published Nippon Catalog Rules (NCR1942) based on ALA 1908, and adopted the author main-entry system for Japanese and Western materials. After World War II, the Japan Library Association (JLA) compiled and published NCR1952, based on ALA 1949 and LC 1949 but maintained the author main-entry system. The main-entry system was then replaced by an alternative heading method, which came to be known as the Description-Independent-System (DIS). NCR1965 adopted the main entry principle, which was based on the Paris Principles of 1961. NCR1977 was compiled and published by the JLA Cataloging Committee and based upon a "no-main-entry principle." Then in 1987, the Committee published the standard edition of the rules, which was completely compatible with the International Standard Bibliographic Description (ISBD). NCR1987R was published in 1994 and NCR1987R01 in 2001, which included revised "Chapter 9: Computer Files," devised according to ISBD(ER).

0.01078829 = product of:
  0.032364868 = sum of:
    0.032364868 = product of:
      0.064729735 = sum of:
        0.064729735 = weight(_text_:librarians in 2626) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.064729735 = score(doc=2626,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.296948 = fieldWeight in 2626, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2626)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The growth of the rules which shape library catalogs and determine their character and usefulness is susceptible of much more extended treatment than is possible here. What is attempted in the following pages is to point out present trends and to indicate their significance. Evidently the year 1941 marked the beginning of a new phase in the evolution of cataloging rules. The publication then of the preliminary American second edition of the A.L.A. Catalog Rules appears as the culmination of a movement inspired exactly one hundred years earlier by the issue of Panizzi's rules. The latter followed a very long period in which rudimentary methods of cataloging slowly evolved and the need of rules to systematize the work gradually came to be recognized. As long as libraries were small and few books were published, the contents of a library could be recorded in any fashion that struck the fancy of the one in charge. Catalogs were made by librarians largely for their own use and had one simple function, that of an inventory or a collection of lists showing the holdings. The form and arrangement of the entries were arbitrary.

0.01078829 = product of:
  0.032364868 = sum of:
    0.032364868 = product of:
      0.064729735 = sum of:
        0.064729735 = weight(_text_:librarians in 5182) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.064729735 = score(doc=5182,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.296948 = fieldWeight in 5182, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5182)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.009342934 = product of:
  0.028028801 = sum of:
    0.028028801 = product of:
      0.056057602 = sum of:
        0.056057602 = weight(_text_:librarians in 1675) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.056057602 = score(doc=1675,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.25716454 = fieldWeight in 1675, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1675)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

An overview of the FRBR model, and how it can improve access to information through the helpful organization of metadata records. What is FRBR, and why is everyone talking about it? Is it really going to revolutionize cataloguing? And if so, what form will it take? This book is written for librarians, bibliographic systems designers, library and information science faculty and students, and anyone else who is interested in learning about the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) and how following the FRBR model can improve access to information through helpful organization of the metadata records that are surrogates for information resources. Serials, art, music, moving images, maps, and archival materials are just a few of the formats covered. Not for catalogers only!

Footnote

Resonanz: "Arlene Taylor and her compadres don't even try to teach you how to construct a hierarchical record. Instead, they direct their efforts toward showcasing what's possible when digital technology and traditional cataloging practice meet. This is the future of cataloging." - Library Media Connection "The emergence of this textbook is testimony to the breadth and depth of work done to date. It documents much of that work, and provides a good basic introduction to FRBR that is broadly understandable... The relational concepts within FRBR are complicated and can be challenging. This book does a good job of illuminating them in a straightforward manner. It also describes how the application of the FRBR concepts could improve our systems of bibliographic access in very specific ways... For those of us that really want or need to be able to predict the impact that FRBR will have on our work, this is an accessible explanation of the current state of the art. As such it is a real contribution to our understanding." - TechKNOW "Understanding FRBR... features chapters contributed by leading authorities in the cataloging field... It offers a basic introduction to FRBR, discussions about FRBR, FRAD (functional requirements for authority data), and RDA (resource description and access), and the issues involved in using FRBR in nontraditional library settings such as with cartographic materials and music. Both books are well illustrated and include numerous bibliographical resources.' [Reviewed in conjuntion with FRBR: A Guide for the Perplexed]." - Library Journal "Taylor and her contributors cover FRBR and introduce the reader to FRAD as well... All chapters conclude with current and useful references to further reading and more information." - Booklist "Understanding FRBR is clearly written, well illustrated (many of the concepts are clarified by very helpful diagrams), and well indexed; additionally, chapters feature extensive bibliographies, many of which provide URLs to the IFLA groups' documents. While it may seem that this book is of interest only to catalogers, the application of FRBR will change the structure of catalog and the systems used to store and display it; therefore, it is an important text for systems librarians, reference librarians, and anybody else interested in the future of the organization and display of bibliographic information." - College & Research Libraries "Understanding FRBR is a useful and timely book that brings together recent developments in FRBR and offers several assessments of it." - Technicalities "No cataloguer, bibliographic systems designer or library and information science lecturers and students should be without this book. It is a useful resource in acquiring an understanding of what FRBR is about and how it will change the way in which cataloguers will think about cataloguing in future." - The Electronic Library

0.008790895 = product of:
  0.026372686 = sum of:
    0.026372686 = product of:
      0.052745372 = sum of:
        0.052745372 = weight(_text_:22 in 4431) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.052745372 = score(doc=4431,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4431, 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=4431)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Source

Zeitschrift für Bibliothekswesen und Bibliographie. 22(1975) H.5, S.387-390

0.0071921926 = product of:
  0.021576578 = sum of:
    0.021576578 = product of:
      0.043153156 = sum of:
        0.043153156 = weight(_text_:librarians in 4058) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043153156 = score(doc=4058,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21798341 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.19796532 = fieldWeight in 4058, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.479444 = idf(docFreq=1362, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4058)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Content

Enthält die Beiträge: Blake, V.L.P.: Forging the Anglo-American Cataloging Alliance: descriptive cataloging, 1830-1908; M. Carpenter, M.: The original 73 rules of the British Museum: a preliminary analysis; De Rijk Spanhoff, E.: Principle issues: catalog paradigms, old and new; Mutula, S.M., Tsvakai, M.: Historical perspectives of cataloguing and classification; Barber, E.E., Tripaldi, N.M., Pisano, S.L.: Facts, approaches, and reflections an classification in the history of Argentine librarianship; MirandaArguedas, A.: Standardization of technical processes in Central American Libraries; Steinhagen, EN.: Historical perspective of a union catalog in Chile: authorities and periodicals; Liu, S.Q., Shen, Z.G.: The development of cataloging in China; Popst, H.: The development of descriptive cataloging in Germany; Croissant, C.R.: RAK or AACR2? : the current discussion in Germany an cataloging rules; Soltani, P.: Historical aspects of cataloging and classification in Iran; Takawashi, T.: Cataloging in Japan: relationship between Japanese and Western cataloging rules; Martinez-Arellano, F.F.: Cataloging and classification history in Mexico; Carter, R.C.: Three book collectors of imperial Spain; Lincoln, T.: Cultural reassertion of Alaska native languages and cultures: libraries' responses; Descriptive standards and the archival profession; Shuler, J.A.: Foundations of government information and bibliographic control in the United States: 1789-1900; Zhou, L.: Characteristics of material organization and classification in the Kinsey Institute Library; Goldberg, J.E.: Development of a universal law classification: a retrospective an Library of Congress Class K; Lubas, R.L.: The evolution of bibliographic control of maps; Guthrie II, L.S.: Monastic cataloging and classification and the beginnings of Class B at the Library of Congress; Bradley, C.J.: Classifying and cataloguing music in American Libraries: a historical overview; Haddad, P.: Cataloging and classification of Pacific and Asian language materials at the National Library of Australia; Russell, B.M.: Description and access in rare books cataloging: a historical survey; Waithe, M.E., Vintro, M.E.: Posthumously plagiarizing Oliva Sabuco: an appeal to cataloging librarians; Walravens, H.: Serials cataloguing in Germany: the historical development; Smiraglia, R.P.: The history of The Work in the modern catalog.

0.0043954477 = product of:
  0.013186343 = sum of:
    0.013186343 = product of:
      0.026372686 = sum of:
        0.026372686 = weight(_text_:22 in 3624) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026372686 = score(doc=3624,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 3624, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3624)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Footnote

Original in: Pettee, J.: The history and theory of the alphabetical subject approach to books. New York: Wilson 1946. S.22-25.

0.0027471548 = product of:
  0.008241464 = sum of:
    0.008241464 = product of:
      0.016482929 = sum of:
        0.016482929 = weight(_text_:22 in 4610) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016482929 = score(doc=4610,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17040971 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.04866305 = queryNorm
            0.09672529 = fieldWeight in 4610, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=4610)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

24.10.2008 14:19:22