Search (8 results, page 1 of 1)

0.065655485 = product of:
  0.13131097 = sum of:
    0.13131097 = sum of:
      0.10055844 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 107) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.10055844 = score(doc=107,freq=14.0), product of:
          0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045395818 = queryNorm
          0.56900144 = fieldWeight in 107, product of:
            3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
              14.0 = termFreq=14.0
            3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=107)
      0.030752534 = weight(_text_:22 in 107) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.030752534 = score(doc=107,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15896842 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045395818 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 107, 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=107)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Forty-five years have passed since Lubetzky outlined the primary objectives of the catalog, which should facilitate the identification of specific bibliographic entities, and the explicit recoguition of works and relationships amongthem. Still, our catalogs are better designed to identify specific bibliographic entities than they are to guide users among the network of potential related editions and translations of works. In this paper, we seck to examine qualitatively some interesting examples of families of related works, defined as bibliographic families. Although the cases described here were derived from a random sample, this is a qualitative analysis. We selected these bibliographic families for their ability to reveal the strengths and weaknesses of Leazer's model, which incorporates relationship taxonomies by Tillett and Smiraglia Qualitatice analysis is intended to produce on explanation of a phenomenou, particularly an identification of any palterns observed. Patterns observed in qualitative analysis can be used to affirm external observations of the same phenomena; conclusions can contribute to what is knoton as grounded theory-a unique explanation grounded in the phenomenon under study. We arrive at two statements of grounded theory concerning bibliographic families: cataloger-generated implicit maps among works are inadequate, and qualitative analysis suggests the complexity of even the smallest bibliographic families. We conclude that user behavior study is needed to suggest which alternative maps are preferable.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.03800752 = product of:
  0.07601504 = sum of:
    0.07601504 = product of:
      0.15203008 = sum of:
        0.15203008 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 3033) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15203008 = score(doc=3033,freq=32.0), product of:
            0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045395818 = queryNorm
            0.86024934 = fieldWeight in 3033, product of:
              5.656854 = tf(freq=32.0), with freq of:
                32.0 = termFreq=32.0
              3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3033)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

In this paper I describe a conceptual design of a bibliographic retrieval system that enables more thourough control of bibliographic entities. A bibliographic entity has 2 components: the intellectual work and the physical item. Users searching bibliographic retrieval systems generally do not search for a specific item, but are willing to retrieve one of several alternative manifestations of a work. However, contemporary bibliographic retrieval systems are based solely on the descriptions of items. Works are described only implcitly by collocating descriptions of items. This method has resulted in a tool that does not include important descriptive attributes of the work, e.g. information regarding its history, its genre, or its bibliographic relationships. A bibliographic relationship is an association between 2 bibliographic entities. A system evaluation methodology wasused to create a conceptual schema for a bibliographic retrieval system. The model is based upon an analysis of data elements in the USMARC Formats for Bibliographic Data. The conceptual schema describes a database comprising 2 separate files of bibliographic descriptions, one of works and the other of items. Each file consists of individual descriptive surrogates of their respective entities. the specific data content of each file is defined by a data dictionary. Data elements used in the description of bibliographic works reflect the nature of works as intellectual and linguistic objects. The descriptive elements of bibliographic items describe the physical properties of bibliographic entities. Bibliographic relationships constitute the logical strucutre of the database

0.03800752 = product of:
  0.07601504 = sum of:
    0.07601504 = product of:
      0.15203008 = sum of:
        0.15203008 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 3663) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15203008 = score(doc=3663,freq=32.0), product of:
            0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045395818 = queryNorm
            0.86024934 = fieldWeight in 3663, product of:
              5.656854 = tf(freq=32.0), with freq of:
                32.0 = termFreq=32.0
              3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3663)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

To contribute to the development of a sophisticated control of bibliographic works research must be build on the growing understanding of the nature of the work and the constitution of bibliographic families. The present study was designed to address the following in the context of a global bibliographic database: OCLC's WorldCat: the proportion of works that are members of bibliographic families; the size of each family; bibliographic characteristics that can be associated with the existence or extent of derivative bibliographic relationships; the frequency with which each type of relationship appears; and the complexity of bibliographic families. A sample of bibliographic families was constructed. Results indicate that a core of works of similar character constitute the bibliographic population of American academic and research libraries (OCLC members). It seems that the canon of derivative works is greater in the academic sphere than in the bibliographic universe represented by OCLC at large. The size of a bibliographic family seems to be related to its popularity or its canonicity. Discipline, form, and genre all fail to demonstrate any influence on derivation of works. Further study of specific segments of the bibliographic universe, for instance the literature of particular disciplines, is clearly called for. The purpose of this research is to contribute to the development of a sophisticated control of bibliographic works and families. In particular, this research is designed to build on our growing understanding of the nature of the work and the constitution of bibliographic families

0.034206767 = product of:
  0.06841353 = sum of:
    0.06841353 = product of:
      0.13682707 = sum of:
        0.13682707 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 5384) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13682707 = score(doc=5384,freq=18.0), product of:
            0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045395818 = queryNorm
            0.7742244 = fieldWeight in 5384, product of:
              4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
                18.0 = termFreq=18.0
              3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5384)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The acquisition of foreign research materials has been an important activity of US university libraries from the early 19th century to the present day. Assesses the extent of bibliographic control over foreign published books and reviews previous evaluations of national bibliographic utility hit rates and quality assessment studies of bibliographic records. These reviews suggest that the bibliographic control of general research books is better than the bibliographic control of foreign research books. However, the previous studies' varying sampling periods and techniques necessitate a baseline study to confirm the asserted difference of these 2 groups os books. Results of the baseline study reported here conforms a lack of bibliographic control for a substanbtial portion of foreign books, the presence of LCC, and the level of bibliographic description shows that the quality of bibliographic records for foreign books is lower than the quality of records for domestic books

0.02974559 = product of:
  0.05949118 = sum of:
    0.05949118 = product of:
      0.11898236 = sum of:
        0.11898236 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 5579) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11898236 = score(doc=5579,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045395818 = queryNorm
            0.6732516 = fieldWeight in 5579, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5579)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Evaluates current research into bibliographic relationships sparked off by B.B. Tillett's taxonomy of bibliographic relationships (LRTS 35(1991) no.4, S.393-405) and R.P. Smiraglia's taxonomy of the derivative bibliographic relationship (PhD dissertation, Chicago Univ., Graduate Library School, 1992). These researches provide the context for a discussion of recent research and standards work. Reevaluates research on the sequential relationship drawn from work conducted on periodicals and the implications of that research is applied to cataloguing system design. Evaluates the conceptual designs proposed by researchers such as G.H. Leazer and M. Gorman's and uses them in a critique of the USMARC format for bibliographic description

0.026605263 = product of:
  0.053210527 = sum of:
    0.053210527 = product of:
      0.10642105 = sum of:
        0.10642105 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 4822) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10642105 = score(doc=4822,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045395818 = queryNorm
            0.6021745 = fieldWeight in 4822, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4822)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

0.023040833 = product of:
  0.046081666 = sum of:
    0.046081666 = product of:
      0.09216333 = sum of:
        0.09216333 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 699) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09216333 = score(doc=699,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045395818 = queryNorm
            0.52149844 = fieldWeight in 699, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=699)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Wilson stated that the work of providing bibliographic services is political in nature because catalogers have to adjudicate amongst the demands made for various forms of control by different communities. Although he did not address the work of the Documentalists directly, his claim is an implicit refutation of their universalist claims. Their efforts were to bring all the world's knowledge together, organize it under a single principle, and make it available to an undifferentiated global community. The concept of "universality" is examined in the context of bibliographic services, looking at claims regarding the collection of knowledge, users, and access.

0.0061505064 = product of:
  0.012301013 = sum of:
    0.012301013 = product of:
      0.024602026 = sum of:
        0.024602026 = weight(_text_:22 in 3231) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024602026 = score(doc=3231,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15896842 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045395818 = queryNorm
            0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 3231, 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=3231)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

3. 6.2005 20:40:22