Search (18 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"O'Neill, E.T."
  1. Hickey, T.B.; Toves, J.; O'Neill, E.T.: NACO normalization : a detailed examination of the authority file comparison rules (2006) 0.06 
    0.059152298 = product of:
  0.118304595 = sum of:
    0.118304595 = sum of:
      0.07525105 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 5760) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07525105 = score(doc=5760,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045395818 = queryNorm
          0.4258017 = fieldWeight in 5760, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5760)
      0.043053545 = weight(_text_:22 in 5760) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.043053545 = score(doc=5760,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15896842 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045395818 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5760, 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=5760)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Normalization rules are essential for interoperability between bibliographic systems. In the process of working with Name Authority Cooperative Program (NACO) authority files to match records with Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) and developing the Faceted Application of Subject Terminology (FAST) subject heading schema, the authors found inconsistencies in independently created NACO normalization implementations. Investigating these, the authors found ambiguities in the NACO standard that need resolution, and came to conclusions on how the procedure could be simplified with little impact on matching headings. To encourage others to test their software for compliance with the current rules, the authors have established a Web site that has test files and interactive services showing their current implementation.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  2. O'Neill, E.T.; Connaway, L.S.; Dickey, T.J.: Estimating the audience level for library resources (2008) 0.06 
    0.05500804 = product of:
  0.11001608 = sum of:
    0.11001608 = sum of:
      0.06081203 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 6654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06081203 = score(doc=6654,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045395818 = queryNorm
          0.34409973 = fieldWeight in 6654, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6654)
      0.04920405 = weight(_text_:22 in 6654) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04920405 = score(doc=6654,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15896842 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045395818 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 6654, 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=6654)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    WorldCat, OCLC's bibliographic database, identifies books and the libraries that hold them. The holdings provide detailed information about the type and number of libraries that have acquired the material. Using this information, it is possible to infer the type of audience for which the material is intended. A quantitative measure, the audience level, is derived from the types of libraries that have selected the resource. The audience level can be used to refine discovery, analyze collections, advise readers, and enhance reference services.
    Date
    8.11.2008 19:22:53
  3. O'Neill, E.T.: FRBR: Functional requirements for bibliographic records application of the entity-relationship model to Humphry Clinker (2002) 0.05 
    0.053383786 = product of:
  0.10676757 = sum of:
    0.10676757 = sum of:
      0.07601504 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2434) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07601504 = score(doc=2434,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045395818 = queryNorm
          0.43012467 = fieldWeight in 2434, product of:
            2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
              8.0 = termFreq=8.0
            3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2434)
      0.030752534 = weight(_text_:22 in 2434) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.030752534 = score(doc=2434,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15896842 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045395818 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2434, 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=2434)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    The report from the IFLA (International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions) Study Group on the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) recommended a new approach to cataloging based on an entity-relationship model. This study examined a single work, The Expedition of Humphry Clinker, to determine benefits and drawbacks associated with creating such an entity-relationship model. Humphry Clinker was selected for several reasons - it has been previously studied, it is widely held, and it is a work of mid-level complexity. In addition to analyzing the bibliographic records, many books were examined to ensure the accuracy of the resulting FRBR model. While it was possible to identify works and manifestations, identifying expressions was problematic. Reliable identification of expressions frequently necessitated the examination of the books themselves. Enhanced manifestation records where the roles of editors, illustrators, translators, and other contributors are explicitly identified may be a viable alternative to expressions. For Humphry Clinker, the enhanced record approach avoids the problem of identifying expressions while providing similar functionality. With the enhanced manifestation record, the three remaining entity-relationship structures - works, manifestations, and items - the FRBR model provides a powerful means to improve bibliographic organization and navigation.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  4. O'Neill, E.T.; Chan, L.M.; Childress, E.; Dean, R.; El-Hoshy, L.M.; Vizine-Goetz, D.: Form subdivisions : their identification and use in LCSH (2001) 0.04 
    0.04125603 = product of:
  0.08251206 = sum of:
    0.08251206 = sum of:
      0.04560902 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2205) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04560902 = score(doc=2205,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045395818 = queryNorm
          0.2580748 = fieldWeight in 2205, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2205)
      0.03690304 = weight(_text_:22 in 2205) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03690304 = score(doc=2205,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15896842 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045395818 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2205, 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=2205)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Form subdivisions have always been an important part of the Library of Congress Subject Headings. However, when the MARC format was developed, no separate subfield code to identify form subdivisions was defined. Form and topical subdivisions were both included within a general subdivision category. In 1995, the USMARC Advisory Group approved a proposal defining subfield v for form subdivisions, and in 1999 the Library of Congress (LC) began identifying form subdivisions with the new code. However, there are millions of older bibliographic records lacking the explicit form subdivision coding. Identifying form subdivisions retrospectively is not a simple task. An algorithmic method was developed to identify form subdivisions coded as general subdivisions. The algorithm was used to identify 2,563 unique form subdivisions or combinations of form subdivisions in OCLC's WorldCat. The algorithm proved to be highly accurate with an error rate estimated to be less than 0.1%. The observed usage of the form subdivisions was highly skewed with the 100 most used form subdivisions or combinations of subdivisions accounting for 90% of the assignments.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  5. Lavoie, B.F.; Connaway, L.S.; O'Neill, E.T.: Mapping WorldCat's digital landscape (2007) 0.04 
    0.04125603 = product of:
  0.08251206 = sum of:
    0.08251206 = sum of:
      0.04560902 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2292) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04560902 = score(doc=2292,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045395818 = queryNorm
          0.2580748 = fieldWeight in 2292, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2292)
      0.03690304 = weight(_text_:22 in 2292) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03690304 = score(doc=2292,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15896842 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045395818 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2292, 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=2292)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Digital materials are reshaping library collections and, by extension, traditional library practice for collecting, organizing, and preserving information. This paper uses OCLC's WorldCat bibliographic database as a data source for examining questions relating to digital materials in library collections, including criteria for identifying digital materials algorithmically in MARC21 records; the quantity, types, characteristics, and holdings patterns of digital materials cataloged in WorldCat; and trends in WorldCat cataloging activity for digital materials over time. Issues pertaining to cataloging practice for digital materials and perspectives on digital holdings at the work level also are discussed. Analysis of the aggregate collection represented by the combined digital holdings in WorldCat affords a high-level perspective on historical patterns, suggests future trends, and supplies useful intelligence with which to inform decision making in a variety of areas.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  6. O'Neill, E.T.: ¬The FRBRization of Humphry Clinker : a case study in the application of IFLA's Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) (2002) 0.03 
    0.03225045 = product of:
  0.0645009 = sum of:
    0.0645009 = product of:
      0.1290018 = sum of:
        0.1290018 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2433) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1290018 = score(doc=2433,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045395818 = queryNorm
            0.7299458 = fieldWeight in 2433, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2433)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    The goal of OCLC's FRBR projects is to examine issues associated with the conversion of a set of bibliographic records to conform to FRBR requirements (a process referred to as "FRBRization"). The goals of this FRBR project were to: - examine issues associated with creating an entity-relationship model for (i.e., "FRBRizing") a non-trivial work - better understand the relationship between the bibliographic records and the bibliographic objects they represent - determine if the information available in the bibliographic record is sufficient to reliably identify the FRBR entities - to develop a data set that could be used to evaluate FRBRization algorithms. Using an exemplary work as a case study, lead scientist Ed O'Neill sought to: - better understand the relationship between bibliographic records and the bibliographic objects they represent - determine if the information available in the bibliographic records is sufficient to reliably identify FRBR entities.
  7. O'Neill, E.T.; Lavoie, B.F.: Bibliographic control for the Web (2000) 0.03 
    0.026605263 = product of:
  0.053210527 = sum of:
    0.053210527 = product of:
      0.10642105 = sum of:
        0.10642105 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 7088) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10642105 = score(doc=7088,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045395818 = queryNorm
            0.6021745 = fieldWeight in 7088, 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=7088)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
  8. Hickey, T.B.; O'Neill, E.T.; Toves, J.: Experiments with the IFLA Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) (2002) 0.03 
    0.026332382 = product of:
  0.052664764 = sum of:
    0.052664764 = product of:
      0.10532953 = sum of:
        0.10532953 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 1660) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10532953 = score(doc=1660,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045395818 = queryNorm
            0.5959982 = fieldWeight in 1660, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1660)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    OCLC is investigating how best to implement IFLA's Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR). As part of that work, we have undertaken a series of experiments with algorithms to group existing bibliographic records into works and expressions. Working with both subsets of records and the whole WorldCat database, the algorithm we developed achieved reasonable success identifying all manifestations of a work.
  9. Zumer, M.; O'Neill, E.T.: Modeling aggregates in FRBR (2012) 0.03 
    0.025496218 = product of:
  0.050992437 = sum of:
    0.050992437 = product of:
      0.10198487 = sum of:
        0.10198487 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 1913) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10198487 = score(doc=1913,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045395818 = queryNorm
            0.5770728 = fieldWeight in 1913, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1913)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    In the bibliographic environment, the term aggregate is used to describe a bibliographic entity formed by combining distinct bibliographic units together. Aggregates are a large and growing class of information resources-up to twenty percent of the bibliographic records in OCLC's WorldCat may represent aggregates. The Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records: Final Report only briefly references aggregates. Difficulties and inconsistencies in the application of the FRBR model to aggregates have been identified as a significant impediment to FRBR implementation. To address the issue, the FRBR Review Group established a Working Group on Aggregates which completed its charge and submitted its final report in 2011. The Working Group proposed that an aggregate be defined as a "manifestation embodying multiple distinct expressions". This paper examines the proposed definition and explores how aggregates can be modeled.
  10. Hickey, T.B.; O'Neill, E.T.: FRBRizing OCLC's WorldCat (2004) 0.02 
    0.023040833 = product of:
  0.046081666 = sum of:
    0.046081666 = product of:
      0.09216333 = sum of:
        0.09216333 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 5859) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09216333 = score(doc=5859,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045395818 = queryNorm
            0.52149844 = fieldWeight in 5859, 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=5859)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    The identification of works according to IFLA's report on Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records offers challenges when applied to very large collections of bibliographic records. We describe an algorithm that identifies sets of works and discuss our experience applying the algorithm to OCLC's WorldCat. Four main types of works have been found in our analysis: augmented, revised, aggregate, and translated works. Each of these offers challenges for proper identification and collocation. Quite apart from algorithmic implementation, difficult conceptual problems were encountered in applying the FRBR model to aggregate works.
    Source
    Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR): hype or cure-all. Ed. by P. le Boeuf,
  11. O'Neill, E.T.; Bennett, R.; Kammerer, K.: Using authorities to improve subject searches (2012) 0.02 
    0.02280451 = product of:
  0.04560902 = sum of:
    0.04560902 = product of:
      0.09121804 = sum of:
        0.09121804 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 310) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09121804 = score(doc=310,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045395818 = queryNorm
            0.5161496 = fieldWeight in 310, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=310)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Authority files have played an important role in improving the quality of indexing and subject cataloging. Although authorities can significantly improve search by increasing the number of access points, they are rarely an integral part of the information retrieval process, particularly end-users searches. A retrieval prototype, searchFAST, was developed to test the feasibility of using an authority file as an index to bibliographic records. searchFAST uses FAST (Faceted Application of Subject Terminology) as an index to OCLC's WorldCat.org bibliographic database. The searchFAST methodology complements, rather than replaces, existing WorldCat.org access. The bibliographic file is searched indirectly; first the authority file is searched to identify appropriate subject headings, then the headings are used to retrieve the matching bibliographic records. The prototype demonstrates the effectiveness and practicality of using an authority file as an index. Searching the authority file leverages authority control work by increasing the number of access points while supporting a simple interface designed for end-users.
  12. O'Neill, E.T.; Bennett, R.; Kammerer, K.: Using authorities to improve subject searches (2014) 0.02 
    0.01900376 = product of:
  0.03800752 = sum of:
    0.03800752 = product of:
      0.07601504 = sum of:
        0.07601504 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 1970) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07601504 = score(doc=1970,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045395818 = queryNorm
            0.43012467 = fieldWeight in 1970, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1970)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Authority files have played an important role in improving the quality of indexing and subject cataloging. Although authorities can significantly improve searching by increasing the number of access points, they are rarely an integral part of the information retrieval process, particularly end-users' searches. A retrieval prototype, searchFAST, was developed to test the feasibility of using an authority file as an index to bibliographic records. searchFAST uses Faceted Application of Subject Terminology (FAST) as an index to OCLC's WorldCat.org bibliographic database. The searchFAST prototype complements, rather than replaces, existing WorldCat.org access. The bibliographic file is searched indirectly; first the authority file is searched to identify appropriate subject headings, then the headings are used to retrieve the matching bibliographic records. The prototype demonstrates the effectiveness and practicality of using an authority file as an index. Searching the authority file leverages authority control work by increasing the number of access points while supporting a simple interface designed for end-users.
  13. Patton, G.; Hengel-Dittrich, C.; O'Neill, E.T.; Tillett, B.B.: VIAF (Virtual International Authority File) : Linking Die Deutsche Bibliothek and Library of Congress Name Authority Files (2006) 0.02 
    0.016457738 = product of:
  0.032915477 = sum of:
    0.032915477 = product of:
      0.06583095 = sum of:
        0.06583095 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 6105) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06583095 = score(doc=6105,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045395818 = queryNorm
            0.3724989 = fieldWeight in 6105, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=6105)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Die Deutsche Bibliothek, the Library of Congress, and OCLC Online Computer Library Center are jointly developing a virtual international authority file (VIAF) for personal names which links authority records from the world's national bibliographic agencies and will be made freely available on the Web. The goals of the project are to prove the viability of automatically linking authority records from different national authority files and to demonstrate its benefits. The authority and bibliographic files from the Library of Congress and Die Deutsche Bibliothek were used to create the initial VIAF which contains over six million names with over a half million links. A key aspect of the project was the development of automated name matching algorithms which use information from both authority records and the corresponding bibliographic records. The practicality of algorithmically linking the personal names between national authority files was demonstrated; seventy percent of the authority records for personal names common to both files were automatically linked with an error rate of less than one percent. The long-term goal of the VIAF project is to combine the authoritative names from many national libraries and other significant sources into a shared global authority service.
  14. Lavoie, B.F.; O'Neill, E.T.: How "World Wide" Is the Web? : Trends in the Internationalization of Web Sites (2001) 0.02 
    0.015376267 = product of:
  0.030752534 = sum of:
    0.030752534 = product of:
      0.061505068 = sum of:
        0.061505068 = weight(_text_:22 in 1066) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.061505068 = score(doc=1066,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.15896842 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045395818 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 1066, 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=1066)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    7.10.2002 9:22:14
  15. O'Neill, E.T.: OCLC authority control (1994) 0.02 
    0.0152030075 = product of:
  0.030406015 = sum of:
    0.030406015 = product of:
      0.06081203 = sum of:
        0.06081203 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 6526) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06081203 = score(doc=6526,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045395818 = queryNorm
            0.34409973 = fieldWeight in 6526, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6526)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    A system based authority control system was essential to support OCLC's large database and the number and diversity of its users. The authority control system had to be able to (1) identify nonidentical heading entries in bibliographic records of the same name, geographic place, or subject, and (2) maintain a link from the erroneous form of the heading to the valid form (i.e. cross reference). Over 3.6 million headings have been corrected as part of these efforts
  16. O'Neill, E.T.: OCLC's experience identifying and using works (2004) 0.02 
    0.0152030075 = product of:
  0.030406015 = sum of:
    0.030406015 = product of:
      0.06081203 = sum of:
        0.06081203 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2459) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06081203 = score(doc=2459,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045395818 = queryNorm
            0.34409973 = fieldWeight in 2459, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2459)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Content
    Beitrag anlässlich des FRBR-Workshops für Expertengruppenmitglieder am 8. und 9. Juli 2004 in Der Deutschen Bibliothek mit der Zielsetzung: Die Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) haben seit ihrer Veröffentlichung 1998 durch die IFLA die bibliothekarische Diskussion befruchtet. Was verbirgt sich hinter den FRBR? Welche Auswirkungen hat dieses Modell, das Beziehungen zwischen Entitäten darstellt, auf Regelwerke, Normdateien, Formate, Online-Kataloge und andere Bereiche? Welche Erfahrungen sind international bereits mit den FRBR gesammelt worden? Können wir die FRBR in Deutschland und Österreich nutzbringend in die Standardisierungsarbeit einbringen?
  17. O'Neill, E.T.; Chan, L.M.: FAST - a new approach to controlled subject access (2008) 0.01 
    0.011402255 = product of:
  0.02280451 = sum of:
    0.02280451 = product of:
      0.04560902 = sum of:
        0.04560902 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2181) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04560902 = score(doc=2181,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045395818 = queryNorm
            0.2580748 = fieldWeight in 2181, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2181)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Recent trends, driven to a large extent by the rapid proliferation of digital resources, are forcing changes in bibliographic control to make it easier to use, understand, and apply subject data. Subject headings are no exception. The enormous volume and rapid growth of digital libraries and repositories and the emergence of numerous metadata schemes have spurred a reexamination of the way subject data are to be provided for such resources efficiently and effectively. To address this need, OCLC in cooperation with the Library of Congress, has taken a new approach, called FAST (Faceted Application of Subject Terminology). FAST headings are based on the existing vocabulary in Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH), but are applied with a simpler syntax than required by Library of Congress application policies. Adapting the LCSH vocabulary in a simplified faceted syntax retains the rich vocabulary of LCSH while making it easier to understand, control, apply, and use.
  18. O'Neill, E.T.; Childress, E.; Dean, R.; Kammerer, K.; Vizine-Goetz, D.; Chan, L.M.; El-Hoshy, L.: FAST: faceted application of subject terminology (2003) 0.01 
    0.00950188 = product of:
  0.01900376 = sum of:
    0.01900376 = product of:
      0.03800752 = sum of:
        0.03800752 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 3816) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03800752 = score(doc=3816,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045395818 = queryNorm
            0.21506234 = fieldWeight in 3816, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3816)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    The Library of Congress Subject Headings schema (LCSH) is by far the most commonly used and widely accepted subject vocabulary for general application. It is the de facto universal controlled vocabulary and has been a model for developing subject heading systems by many countries. However, LCSH's complex syntax and rules for constructing headings restrict its application by requiring highly skilled personnel and limit the effectiveness of automated authority control. Recent trends, driven to a large extent by the rapid growth of the Web, are forcing changes in bibliographic control systems to make them easier to use, understand, and apply, and subject headings are no exception. The purpose of adapting the LCSH with a simplified syntax to create FAST is to retain the very rich vocabulary of LCSH while making the schema easier to understand, control, apply, and use. The schema maintains upward compatibility with LCSH, and any valid set of LC subject headings can be converted to FAST headings.

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 17
  • a 1

Types

Themes