Search (210 results, page 1 of 11)

  • × theme_ss:"Datenformate"
  1. Weber, R.: "Functional requirements for bibliographic records" und Regelwerksentwicklung (2001) 0.10 
    0.09626407 = product of:
  0.19252814 = sum of:
    0.19252814 = sum of:
      0.10642105 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 6838) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.10642105 = score(doc=6838,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045395818 = queryNorm
          0.6021745 = fieldWeight in 6838, 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=6838)
      0.08610709 = weight(_text_:22 in 6838) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08610709 = score(doc=6838,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15896842 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045395818 = 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)
    Source
    Dialog mit Bibliotheken. 13(2001) H.3, S.20-22
  2. Tennant, R.: ¬A bibliographic metadata infrastructure for the twenty-first century (2004) 0.08 
    0.07779312 = product of:
  0.15558624 = sum of:
    0.15558624 = sum of:
      0.086001195 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2845) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.086001195 = score(doc=2845,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045395818 = queryNorm
          0.4866305 = fieldWeight in 2845, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2845)
      0.06958504 = weight(_text_:22 in 2845) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06958504 = score(doc=2845,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.15896842 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045395818 = queryNorm
          0.4377287 = fieldWeight in 2845, 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=2845)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    The current library bibliographic infrastructure was constructed in the early days of computers - before the Web, XML, and a variety of other technological advances that now offer new opportunities. General requirements of a modern metadata infrastructure for libraries are identified, including such qualities as versatility, extensibility, granularity, and openness. A new kind of metadata infrastructure is then proposed that exhibits at least some of those qualities. Some key challenges that must be overcome to implement a change of this magnitude are identified.
    Date
    9.12.2005 19:22:38
    Source
    Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2, S.175-181
  3. Mishra, K.S.: Bibliographic databases and exchange formats (1997) 0.08 
    0.07726679 = product of:
  0.15453358 = sum of:
    0.15453358 = sum of:
      0.10532953 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 1757) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.10532953 = score(doc=1757,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045395818 = queryNorm
          0.5959982 = fieldWeight in 1757, 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=1757)
      0.04920405 = weight(_text_:22 in 1757) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04920405 = score(doc=1757,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15896842 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045395818 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1757, 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=1757)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Computers play an important role in the development of bibliographic databases. Exchange formats are needed for the generation and exchange of bibliographic data at different levels: international, national, regional and local. Discusses the formats available at national and international level such as the International Standard Exchange Format (ISO 2709); the various MARC formats and the Common Communication Format (CCF). Work on Indian standards involving the Bureau of Indian Standards, the National Information System for Science and Technology (NISSAT) and other institutions proceeds only slowly
    Source
    DESIDOC bulletin of information technology. 17(1997) no.5, S.17-22
  4. Riva, P.: Mapping MARC 21 linking entry fields to FRBR and Tillett's taxonomy of bibliographic relationships (2004) 0.07 
    0.069443956 = product of:
  0.13888791 = sum of:
    0.13888791 = sum of:
      0.10198487 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 136) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.10198487 = score(doc=136,freq=10.0), product of:
          0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045395818 = queryNorm
          0.5770728 = fieldWeight in 136, 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=136)
      0.03690304 = weight(_text_:22 in 136) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03690304 = score(doc=136,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15896842 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045395818 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 136, 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=136)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Bibliographic relationships have taken on even greater importance in the context of ongoing efforts to integrate concepts from the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) into cataloging codes and database structures. In MARC 21, the linking entry fields are a major mechanism for expressing relationships between bibliographic records. Taxonomies of bibliographic relationships have been proposed by Tillett, with an extension by Smiraglia, and in FRBR itself. The present exercise is to provide a detailed bidirectional mapping of the MARC 21 linking fields to these two schemes. The correspondence of the Tillett taxonomic divisions to the MARC categorization of the linking fields as chronological, horizontal, or vertical is examined as well. Application of the findings to MARC format development and system functionality is discussed.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  5. Snow, M.: Visual depictions and the use of MARC : a view from the trenches of slide librarianship (1989) 0.07 
    0.06760844 = product of:
  0.13521688 = sum of:
    0.13521688 = sum of:
      0.09216333 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.09216333 = score(doc=2862,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045395818 = queryNorm
          0.52149844 = fieldWeight in 2862, 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=2862)
      0.043053545 = weight(_text_:22 in 2862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.043053545 = score(doc=2862,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15896842 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045395818 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2862, 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=2862)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Paper presented at a symposium on 'Implementing the Art and Architecture Thesaurus (AAT): Controlled Vocabulary in the Extended MARC format', held at the 1989 Annual Conference of the Art Libraries Society of North America. The only way to get bibliographic records on to campus on-line library catalogues, and slide records on the national bibliographic utilities, is through the use of MARC. Discusses the importance of having individual slide and photograph records on the national bibliographic utilities, and considers the obstacles which currently make this difficult. Discusses mapping to MARC from data base management systems.
    Date
    4.12.1995 22:51:36
  6. Gopinath, M.A.: Standardization for resource sharing databases (1995) 0.07 
    0.06760262 = product of:
  0.13520524 = sum of:
    0.13520524 = sum of:
      0.086001195 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 4414) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.086001195 = score(doc=4414,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045395818 = queryNorm
          0.4866305 = fieldWeight in 4414, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4414)
      0.04920405 = weight(_text_:22 in 4414) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04920405 = score(doc=4414,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15896842 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045395818 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4414, 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=4414)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    It is helpful and essential to adopt standards for bibliographic information, project description and institutional information which are shareable for access to information resources within a country. Describes a strategy for adopting international standards of bibliographic information exchange for developing a resource sharing facilitation database in India. A list of 22 ISO standards for information processing is included
  7. Coyle, K.: Future considerations : the functional library systems record (2004) 0.07 
    0.06760262 = product of:
  0.13520524 = sum of:
    0.13520524 = sum of:
      0.086001195 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.086001195 = score(doc=562,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045395818 = queryNorm
          0.4866305 = fieldWeight in 562, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=562)
      0.04920405 = weight(_text_:22 in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04920405 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15896842 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045395818 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 562, 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=562)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    The paper performs a thought experiment on the concept of a record based on the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records and library system functions, and concludes that if we want to develop a functional bibliographic record we need to do it within the context of a flexible, functional library systems record structure. The article suggests a new way to look at the library systems record that would allow libraries to move forward in terms of technology but also in terms of serving library users.
    Source
    Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2, S.166-174
  8. Caplan, P.; Guenther, R.: Metadata for Internet resources : the Dublin Core Metadata Elements Set and its mapping to USMARC (1996) 0.07 
    0.06519853 = product of:
  0.13039707 = sum of:
    0.13039707 = sum of:
      0.06081203 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2408) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06081203 = score(doc=2408,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045395818 = queryNorm
          0.34409973 = fieldWeight in 2408, 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=2408)
      0.06958504 = weight(_text_:22 in 2408) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06958504 = score(doc=2408,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.15896842 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045395818 = 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)
    Date
    13. 1.2007 18:31:22
    Footnote
    Simultaneously published as Electronic Resources: Selection and Bibliographic Control
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 22(1996) nos.3/4, S.43-58
  9. Lee, S.; Jacob, E.K.: ¬An integrated approach to metadata interoperability : construction of a conceptual structure between MARC and FRBR (2011) 0.06 
    0.06406054 = product of:
  0.12812108 = sum of:
    0.12812108 = sum of:
      0.09121804 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 302) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.09121804 = score(doc=302,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045395818 = queryNorm
          0.5161496 = fieldWeight in 302, 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=302)
      0.03690304 = weight(_text_:22 in 302) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03690304 = score(doc=302,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15896842 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045395818 = 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)
    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
  10. Crook, M.: Barbara Tillett discusses cataloging rules and conceptual models (1996) 0.06 
    0.059152298 = product of:
  0.118304595 = sum of:
    0.118304595 = sum of:
      0.07525105 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 7683) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07525105 = score(doc=7683,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045395818 = queryNorm
          0.4258017 = fieldWeight in 7683, 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=7683)
      0.043053545 = weight(_text_:22 in 7683) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.043053545 = score(doc=7683,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15896842 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045395818 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 7683, 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=7683)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    The chief of cataloguing policy and support office at the LoC presents her views on the usefulness of conceptual modelling in determining future directions for cataloguing and the MARC format. After describing the evolution of bibliographic processes, suggests usign the entity-relationship conceptual model to step back from how we record information today and start thinking about what information really means and why we provide it. Argues that now is the time to reexamine the basic principles which underpin Anglo-American cataloguing codes and that MARC formats should be looked at to see how they can evolve towards a future, improved structure for communicating bibliographic and authority information
    Source
    OCLC newsletter. 1996, no.220, S.20-22
  11. Aalberg, T.; Haugen, F.B.; Husby, O.: ¬A Tool for Converting from MARC to FRBR (2006) 0.06 
    0.059152298 = product of:
  0.118304595 = sum of:
    0.118304595 = sum of:
      0.07525105 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2425) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.07525105 = score(doc=2425,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045395818 = queryNorm
          0.4258017 = fieldWeight in 2425, 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=2425)
      0.043053545 = weight(_text_:22 in 2425) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.043053545 = score(doc=2425,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15896842 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045395818 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2425, 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=2425)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    The FRBR model is by many considered to be an important contribution to the next generation of bibliographic catalogues, but a major challenge for the library community is how to use this model on already existing MARC-based bibliographic catalogues. This problem requires a solution for the interpretation and conversion of MARC records, and a tool for this kind of conversion is developed as a part of the Norwegian BIBSYS FRBR project. The tool is based on a systematic approach to the interpretation and conversion process and is designed to be adaptable to the rules applied in different catalogues.
    Source
    Research and advanced technology for digital libraries : 10th European conference, proceedings / ECDL 2006, Alicante, Spain, September 17 - 22, 2006
  12. Jacobs, J.W.; Summers, E.; Ankersen, E.: Cyril: expanding the horizons of MARC21 (2004) 0.06 
    0.05500804 = product of:
  0.11001608 = sum of:
    0.11001608 = sum of:
      0.06081203 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 4749) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06081203 = score(doc=4749,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045395818 = queryNorm
          0.34409973 = fieldWeight in 4749, 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=4749)
      0.04920405 = weight(_text_:22 in 4749) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04920405 = score(doc=4749,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15896842 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045395818 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4749, 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=4749)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Describes the construction of the author's Perl program, Cyril, to add vernacular Russian (Cyrillic) characters to existing MARC records. The program takes advantage of the ALA-LC standards for Romanization to create character mappings that "de-transliterate" specified MARC fields. The creation of Cyril raises both linguistic and technical issues, which are thoroughly examined. Concludes by considering the implications for cataloging and authority control standards, as we move to a multilingual, multi-script bibliographic environment.
    Source
    Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1, S.8-17
  13. Weber, L.B.: Reading formatting MARC AMC (1990) 0.06 
    0.05500804 = product of:
  0.11001608 = sum of:
    0.11001608 = sum of:
      0.06081203 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 484) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06081203 = score(doc=484,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045395818 = queryNorm
          0.34409973 = fieldWeight in 484, 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=484)
      0.04920405 = weight(_text_:22 in 484) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04920405 = score(doc=484,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15896842 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045395818 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 484, 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=484)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    This paper discusses how archivists use the MARC AMC format to exchange information about archival materials. The paper explains the modifications that MARC AMC introduced to the MARC bibliographic formats; gives examples of a record in generic USMARC AMC, RLIN AMC, and OCLC AMC; and considers the possible impact of format integration. The paper concludes with some thoughts about the changes that MARC AMC is causing in the archival profession.
    Date
    8. 1.2007 14:22:51
  14. El-Sherbini, M.A.: Cataloging and classification : review of the literature 2005-06 (2008) 0.06 
    0.05500804 = product of:
  0.11001608 = sum of:
    0.11001608 = sum of:
      0.06081203 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 249) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06081203 = score(doc=249,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045395818 = queryNorm
          0.34409973 = fieldWeight in 249, 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=249)
      0.04920405 = weight(_text_:22 in 249) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04920405 = score(doc=249,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15896842 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045395818 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 249, 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=249)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    This paper reviews library literature on cataloging and classification published in 2005-06. It covers pertinent literature in the following areas: the future of cataloging; Functional Requirement for Bibliographic Records (FRBR); metadata and its applications and relation to Machine-Readable Cataloging (MARC); cataloging tools and standards; authority control; and recruitment, training, and the changing role of catalogers.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  15. Andresen, L.: After MARC - what then? (2004) 0.05 
    0.05070197 = product of:
  0.10140394 = sum of:
    0.10140394 = sum of:
      0.0645009 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 4751) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0645009 = score(doc=4751,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045395818 = queryNorm
          0.3649729 = fieldWeight in 4751, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4751)
      0.03690304 = weight(_text_:22 in 4751) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03690304 = score(doc=4751,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15896842 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045395818 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4751, 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=4751)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    The article discusses the future of the MARC formats and outlines how future cataloguing practice and bibliographic records might look. Background and basic functionality of the MARC formats are outlined, and it is pointed out that MARC is manifest in several different formats. This is illustrated through a comparison between the MARC21 format and the Danish MARC format "danMARC2". It is argued that present cataloguing codes and MARC formats are based primarily on the Paris principles and that "functional requirements for bibliographic records" (FRBR) would serve as a more solid and user-oriented platform for future development of cataloguing codes and formats. Furthermore, it is argued that MARC is a library-specific format, which results in neither exchange with library external sectors nor inclusion of other texts being facilitated. XML could serve as the technical platform for a model for future registrations, consisting of some core data and different supplements of data necessary for different sectors and purposes.
    Source
    Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1, S.40-51
  16. Carvalho, J.R. de; Cordeiro, M.I.; Lopes, A.; Vieira, M.: Meta-information about MARC : an XML framework for validation, explanation and help systems (2004) 0.05 
    0.048132036 = product of:
  0.09626407 = sum of:
    0.09626407 = sum of:
      0.053210527 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2848) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.053210527 = score(doc=2848,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045395818 = queryNorm
          0.30108726 = fieldWeight in 2848, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2848)
      0.043053545 = weight(_text_:22 in 2848) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.043053545 = score(doc=2848,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15896842 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045395818 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2848, 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=2848)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    This article proposes a schema for meta-information about MARC that can express at a fairly comprehensive level the syntactic and semantic aspects of MARC formats in XML, including not only rules but also all texts and examples that are conveyed by MARC documentation. It can be thought of as an XML version of the MARC or UNIMARC manuals, for both machine and human usage. The article explains how such a schema can be the central piece of a more complete framework, to be used in conjunction with "slim" record formats, providing a rich environment for the automated processing of bibliographic data.
    Source
    Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2, S.131-137
  17. Devadason, F.J.: Common format for machine-readable bibliographic records for India : a proposal (1978) 0.05 
    0.046081666 = product of:
  0.09216333 = sum of:
    0.09216333 = product of:
      0.18432666 = sum of:
        0.18432666 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 5539) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.18432666 = score(doc=5539,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
              0.045395818 = queryNorm
            1.0429969 = fieldWeight in 5539, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=5539)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    Towards a common bibliographic exchange format? International Symposium on Bibliographic Exchange Formats, Taormina, Sicily, 27-29 April 1978
  18. Mönch, C.; Aalberg, T.: Automatic conversion from MARC to FRBR (2003) 0.04 
    0.04225164 = product of:
  0.08450328 = sum of:
    0.08450328 = sum of:
      0.053750746 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2422) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.053750746 = score(doc=2422,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045395818 = queryNorm
          0.30414405 = fieldWeight in 2422, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2422)
      0.030752534 = weight(_text_:22 in 2422) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.030752534 = score(doc=2422,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15896842 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045395818 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2422, 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=2422)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Catalogs have for centuries been the main tool that enabled users to search for items in a library by author, title, or subject. A catalog can be interpreted as a set of bibliographic records, where each record acts as a surrogate for a publication. Every record describes a specific publication and contains the data that is used to create the indexes of search systems and the information that is presented to the user. Bibliographic records are often captured and exchanged by the use of the MARC format. Although there are numerous rdquodialectsrdquo of the MARC format in use, they are usually crafted on the same basis and are interoperable with each other -to a certain extent. The data model of a MARC-based catalog, however, is rdquo[...] extremely non-normalized with excessive replication of datardquo [1]. For instance, a literary work that exists in numerous editions and translations is likely to yield a large result set because each edition or translation is represented by an individual record, that is unrelated to other records that describe the same work.
    Source
    Research and advanced technology for digital libraries : 7th European Conference, proceedings / ECDL 2003, Trondheim, Norway, August 17-22, 2003
  19. Croissant, C.R.: MARC21 und die anglo-amerikanische Katalogisierungspraxis (2004) 0.04 
    0.04125603 = product of:
  0.08251206 = sum of:
    0.08251206 = sum of:
      0.04560902 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 1764) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04560902 = score(doc=1764,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045395818 = queryNorm
          0.2580748 = fieldWeight in 1764, 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=1764)
      0.03690304 = weight(_text_:22 in 1764) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03690304 = score(doc=1764,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15896842 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045395818 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1764, 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=1764)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Das MARC21-Datenformat wird aus der Sicht eines praktizierenden AACR2/MARC-Katalogisierers vorgeführt. Der Autor gibt zunächst eine allgemeine Einführung in das MARC21 Bibliographic Format. Der zweite Abschnitt der Arbeit ist der Erschließung von mehrteiligen bzw. mehrbändigen Werken gewidmet. Die Behandlung von mehrteiligen bzw. mehrbändigen Werken, in der AACR2-Welt "Analyse" genannt, ist nämlich der Punkt, an dem die anglo-amerikanische und die deutsche Katalogisierungspraxis am weitesten auseinandergehen. Die verschiedenen Formen der "Analyse" werden erläutert im Hinblick auf die Frage, inwiefern diese Praxen den Bedürfnissen der Benutzer gerecht werden. Auf eine kurze Behandlung der besonderen Problematik der fortlaufenden Sammelwerke folgt dann eine Einführung in das MARC21 Authorities Format für Normdatensätze. Die Rolle der verschiedenen Arten von Normdatensätzen bei der Katalogisierung wird auch besprochen. DerAufsatz schließt mit einem Kommentar über verschiedene Aspekte der Verlinkung von Datensätzen.
    Date
    13. 8.2004 21:22:06
  20. McCallum, S.H.: Machine Readable Cataloging (MARC): 1975-2007 (2009) 0.04 
    0.04125603 = product of:
  0.08251206 = sum of:
    0.08251206 = sum of:
      0.04560902 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 3841) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04560902 = score(doc=3841,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17672792 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045395818 = queryNorm
          0.2580748 = fieldWeight in 3841, 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=3841)
      0.03690304 = weight(_text_:22 in 3841) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03690304 = score(doc=3841,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.15896842 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.045395818 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3841, 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=3841)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    This entry describes the development of the MARC Communications format. After a brief overview of the initial 10 years it describes the succeeding phases of development up to the present. This takes the reader through the expansion of the format for all types of bibliographic data and for a multiple character scripts. At the same time a large business community was developing that offered products based on the format to the library community. The introduction of the Internet in the 1990s and the Web technology brought new opportunities and challenges and the format was adapted to this new environment. There has been a great deal of international adoption of the format that has continued into the 2000s. More recently new syntaxes for MARC 21 and models are being explored.
    Date
    27. 8.2011 14:22:38

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 164
  • d 23
  • f 10
  • sp 2
  • nl 1
  • pl 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 165
  • m 22
  • s 14
  • el 5
  • r 4
  • ? 2
  • b 2
  • l 2
  • n 2
  • x 2
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications