Search (97 results, page 1 of 5)

0.022943946 = product of:
  0.09177578 = sum of:
    0.07010286 = weight(_text_:network in 3052) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07010286 = score(doc=3052,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17809492 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
          0.039991006 = queryNorm
        0.3936264 = fieldWeight in 3052, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3052)
    0.021672918 = product of:
      0.043345835 = sum of:
        0.043345835 = weight(_text_:22 in 3052) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043345835 = score(doc=3052,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1400417 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.039991006 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3052, 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=3052)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)

Abstract

Discusses the origins of the MARC format and its development connected with the proceedings of the Library of Congress and the British Library. Presents 2 standards: ISO 2709 and ISBD. Focuses on national and international formats elaborated in the 1970s and 1980s, including UNIMARC (1975) and CCF (1984). Outlines the prospects and directions of MARC format development, that is, integration of the format and implementing MARC in the network environment

Date

22. 2.1999 20:34:37

0.02079242 = product of:
  0.08316968 = sum of:
    0.052577145 = weight(_text_:network in 2773) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.052577145 = score(doc=2773,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17809492 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
          0.039991006 = queryNorm
        0.29521978 = fieldWeight in 2773, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2773)
    0.03059253 = product of:
      0.06118506 = sum of:
        0.06118506 = weight(_text_:resources in 2773) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06118506 = score(doc=2773,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.14598069 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
              0.039991006 = queryNorm
            0.4191312 = fieldWeight in 2773, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2773)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)

Abstract

In response to libraries' frustration over their rich resources being invisible on the web, Zepheira, at the request of the Library of Congress, created BIBFRAME, a bibliographic metadata framework for cataloging. The model replaces MARC records with linked data, promoting resource visibility through a rich network of links. In place of formal taxonomies, a small but extensible vocabulary streamlines metadata efforts. Rather than using a unique bibliographic record to describe one item, BIBFRAME draws on the Dublin Core and the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) to generate formalized descriptions of Work, Instance, Authority and Annotation as well as associations between items. Zepheira trains librarians to transform MARC records to BIBFRAME resources and adapt the vocabulary for specialized needs, while subject matter experts and technical experts manage content, site design and usability. With a different approach toward data modeling and metadata, previously invisible resources gain visibility through linking.

0.019909987 = product of:
  0.0530933 = sum of:
    0.014752497 = weight(_text_:computer in 1166) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014752497 = score(doc=1166,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1461475 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6545093 = idf(docFreq=3109, maxDocs=44218)
          0.039991006 = queryNorm
        0.100942515 = fieldWeight in 1166, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.6545093 = idf(docFreq=3109, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1166)
    0.030981382 = weight(_text_:network in 1166) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030981382 = score(doc=1166,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.17809492 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
          0.039991006 = queryNorm
        0.17395994 = fieldWeight in 1166, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1166)
    0.0073594186 = product of:
      0.014718837 = sum of:
        0.014718837 = weight(_text_:resources in 1166) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014718837 = score(doc=1166,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14598069 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
              0.039991006 = queryNorm
            0.10082729 = fieldWeight in 1166, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1166)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.375 = coord(3/8)

Abstract

This article presents an overview of the LEAF project (Linking and Exploring Authority Files)1, which has set out to provide a framework for international, collaborative work in the sector of authority data with respect to authority control. Elaborating the virtues of authority control in today's Web environment is an almost futile exercise, since so much has been said and written about it in the last few years.2 The World Wide Web is generally understood to be poorly structured-both with regard to content and to locating required information. Highly structured databases might be viewed as small islands of precision within this chaotic environment. Though the Web in general or any particular structured database would greatly benefit from increased authority control, it should be noted that our following considerations only refer to authority control with regard to databases of "memory institutions" (i.e., libraries, archives, and museums). Moreover, when talking about authority records, we exclusively refer to personal name authority records that describe a specific person. Although different types of authority records could indeed be used in similar ways to the ones presented in this article, discussing those different types is outside the scope of both the LEAF project and this article. Personal name authority records-as are all other "authorities"-are maintained as separate records and linked to various kinds of descriptive records. Name authority records are usually either kept in independent databases or in separate tables in the database containing the descriptive records. This practice points at a crucial benefit: by linking any number of descriptive records to an authorized name record, the records related to this entity are collocated in the database. Variant forms of the authorized name are referenced in the authority records and thus ensure the consistency of the database while enabling search and retrieval operations that produce accurate results. On one hand, authority control may be viewed as a positive prerequisite of a consistent catalogue; on the other, the creation of new authority records is a very time consuming and expensive undertaking. As a consequence, various models of providing access to existing authority records have emerged: the Library of Congress and the French National Library (Bibliothèque nationale de France), for example, make their authority records available to all via a web-based search service.3 In Germany, the Personal Name Authority File (PND, Personennamendatei4) maintained by the German National Library (Die Deutsche Bibliothek, Frankfurt/Main) offers a different approach to shared access: within a closed network, participating institutions have online access to their pooled data. The number of recent projects and initiatives that have addressed the issue of authority control in one way or another is considerable.5 Two important current initiatives should be mentioned here: The Name Authority Cooperative (NACO) and Virtual International Authority File (VIAF).
NACO was established in 1976 and is hosted by the Library of Congress. At the beginning of 2003, nearly 400 institutions were involved in this undertaking, including 43 institutions from outside the United States.6 Despite the enormous success of NACO and the impressive annual growth of the initiative, there are requirements for participation that form an obstacle for many institutions: they have to follow the Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules (AACR2) and employ the MARC217 data format. Participating institutions also have to belong to either OCLC (Online Computer Library Center) or RLG (Research Libraries Group) in order to be able to contribute records, and they have to provide a specified minimum number of authority records per year. A recent proof of concept project of the Library of Congress, OCLC and the German National Library-Virtual International Authority File (VIAF)8-will, in its first phase, test automatic linking of the records of the Library of Congress Name Authority File (LCNAF) and the German Personal Name Authority File by using matching algorithms and software developed by OCLC. The results are expected to form the basis of a "Virtual International Authority File". The project will then test the maintenance of the virtual authority file by employing the Open Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata Harvesting (OAI-PMH)9 to harvest the metadata for new, updated, and deleted records. When using the "Virtual International Authority File" a cataloguer will be able to check the system to see whether the authority record he wants to establish already exists. The final phase of the project will test possibilities for displaying records in the preferred language and script of the end user. Currently, there are still some clear limitations associated with the ways in which authority records are used by memory institutions. One of the main problems has to do with limited access: generally only large institutions or those that are part of a library network have unlimited online access to permanently updated authority records. Smaller institutions outside these networks usually have to fall back on less efficient ways of obtaining authority data, or have no access at all. Cross-domain sharing of authority data between libraries, archives, museums and other memory institutions simply does not happen at present. Public users are, by and large, not even aware that such things as name authority records exist and are excluded from access to these information resources.

0.019808577 = product of:
  0.052822873 = sum of:
    0.017702997 = weight(_text_:computer in 1169) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017702997 = score(doc=1169,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1461475 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6545093 = idf(docFreq=3109, maxDocs=44218)
          0.039991006 = queryNorm
        0.12113102 = fieldWeight in 1169, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.6545093 = idf(docFreq=3109, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1169)
    0.026288573 = weight(_text_:network in 1169) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026288573 = score(doc=1169,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17809492 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
          0.039991006 = queryNorm
        0.14760989 = fieldWeight in 1169, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1169)
    0.008831303 = product of:
      0.017662605 = sum of:
        0.017662605 = weight(_text_:resources in 1169) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017662605 = score(doc=1169,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14598069 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
              0.039991006 = queryNorm
            0.12099275 = fieldWeight in 1169, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1169)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.375 = coord(3/8)

Abstract

T.1: Today's thesauri are mostly electronic tools, having moved on from the paper-based era when thesaurus standards were first developed. They are built and maintained with the support of software and need to integrate with other software, such as search engines and content management systems. Whereas in the past thesauri were designed for information professionals trained in indexing and searching, today there is a demand for vocabularies that untrained users will find to be intuitive. ISO 25964 makes the transition needed for the world of electronic information management. However, part 1 retains the assumption that human intellect is usually involved in the selection of indexing terms and in the selection of search terms. If both the indexer and the searcher are guided to choose the same term for the same concept, then relevant documents will be retrieved. This is the main principle underlying thesaurus design, even though a thesaurus built for human users may also be applied in situations where computers make the choices. Efficient exchange of data is a vital component of thesaurus management and exploitation. Hence the inclusion in this standard of recommendations for exchange formats and protocols. Adoption of these will facilitate interoperability between thesaurus management systems and the other computer applications, such as indexing and retrieval systems, that will utilize the data. Thesauri are typically used in post-coordinate retrieval systems, but may also be applied to hierarchical directories, pre-coordinate indexes and classification systems. Increasingly, thesaurus applications need to mesh with others, such as automatic categorization schemes, free-text search systems, etc. Part 2 of ISO 25964 describes additional types of structured vocabulary and gives recommendations to enable interoperation of the vocabularies at all stages of the information storage and retrieval process.
T.2: The ability to identify and locate relevant information among vast collections and other resources is a major and pressing challenge today. Several different types of vocabulary are in use for this purpose. Some of the most widely used vocabularies were designed a hundred years ago and have been evolving steadily. A different generation of vocabularies is now emerging, designed to exploit the electronic media more effectively. A good understanding of the previous generation is still essential for effective access to collections indexed with them. An important object of ISO 25964 as a whole is to support data exchange and other forms of interoperability in circumstances in which more than one structured vocabulary is applied within one retrieval system or network. Sometimes one vocabulary has to be mapped to another, and it is important to understand both the potential and the limitations of such mappings. In other systems, a thesaurus is mapped to a classification scheme, or an ontology to a thesaurus. Comprehensive interoperability needs to cover the whole range of vocabulary types, whether young or old. Concepts in different vocabularies are related only in that they have the same or similar meaning. However, the meaning can be found in a number of different aspects within each particular type of structured vocabulary: - within terms or captions selected in different languages; - in the notation assigned indicating a place within a larger hierarchy; - in the definition, scope notes, history notes and other notes that explain the significance of that concept; and - in explicit relationships to other concepts or entities within the same vocabulary. In order to create mappings from one structured vocabulary to another it is first necessary to understand, within the context of each different type of structured vocabulary, the significance and relative importance of each of the different elements in defining the meaning of that particular concept. ISO 25964-1 describes the key characteristics of thesauri along with additional advice on best practice. ISO 25964-2 focuses on other types of vocabulary and does not attempt to cover all aspects of good practice. It concentrates on those aspects which need to be understood if one of the vocabularies is to work effectively alongside one or more of the others. Recognizing that a new standard cannot be applied to some existing vocabularies, this part of ISO 25964 provides informative description alongside the recommendations, the aim of which is to enable users and system developers to interpret and implement the existing vocabularies effectively. The remainder of ISO 25964-2 deals with the principles and practicalities of establishing mappings between vocabularies.

0.015988765 = product of:
  0.12791012 = sum of:
    0.12791012 = sum of:
      0.06660985 = weight(_text_:resources in 2408) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06660985 = score(doc=2408,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.14598069 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
            0.039991006 = queryNorm
          0.45629224 = fieldWeight in 2408, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2408)
      0.06130027 = weight(_text_:22 in 2408) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.06130027 = score(doc=2408,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.1400417 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.039991006 = 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)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

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

0.0150676975 = product of:
  0.06027079 = sum of:
    0.041306987 = weight(_text_:computer in 2425) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.041306987 = score(doc=2425,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1461475 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6545093 = idf(docFreq=3109, maxDocs=44218)
          0.039991006 = queryNorm
        0.28263903 = fieldWeight in 2425, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.6545093 = idf(docFreq=3109, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2425)
    0.018963803 = product of:
      0.037927605 = sum of:
        0.037927605 = weight(_text_:22 in 2425) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037927605 = score(doc=2425,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1400417 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.039991006 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)

Series

Lecture notes in computer science; vol.4172

Source

Research and advanced technology for digital libraries : 10th European conference, proceedings / ECDL 2006, Alicante, Spain, September 17 - 22, 2006

0.011305764 = product of:
  0.090446115 = sum of:
    0.090446115 = sum of:
      0.04710028 = weight(_text_:resources in 4414) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04710028 = score(doc=4414,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14598069 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
            0.039991006 = queryNorm
          0.32264733 = fieldWeight in 4414, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4414)
      0.043345835 = weight(_text_:22 in 4414) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.043345835 = score(doc=4414,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1400417 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.039991006 = 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)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

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

0.011305764 = product of:
  0.090446115 = sum of:
    0.090446115 = sum of:
      0.04710028 = weight(_text_:resources in 81) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04710028 = score(doc=81,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14598069 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
            0.039991006 = queryNorm
          0.32264733 = fieldWeight in 81, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=81)
      0.043345835 = weight(_text_:22 in 81) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.043345835 = score(doc=81,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1400417 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.039991006 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 81, 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=81)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

This paper provides an introduction to the Metadata Object Description Schema (MODS), a MARC21 compatible XML schema for descriptive metadata. It explains the requirements that the schema targets and the special features that differentiate it from MARC, such as user-oriented tags, regrouped data elements, linking, recursion, and accommodations for electronic resources.

Source

Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1, S.82-88

0.011305764 = product of:
  0.090446115 = sum of:
    0.090446115 = sum of:
      0.04710028 = weight(_text_:resources in 132) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04710028 = score(doc=132,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14598069 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
            0.039991006 = queryNorm
          0.32264733 = fieldWeight in 132, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=132)
      0.043345835 = weight(_text_:22 in 132) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.043345835 = score(doc=132,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1400417 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.039991006 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 132, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=132)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

Source

Library resources and technical services. 48(2004) no.3, S.165-178

0.011305764 = product of:
  0.090446115 = sum of:
    0.090446115 = sum of:
      0.04710028 = weight(_text_:resources in 249) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04710028 = score(doc=249,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14598069 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
            0.039991006 = queryNorm
          0.32264733 = fieldWeight in 249, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=249)
      0.043345835 = weight(_text_:22 in 249) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.043345835 = score(doc=249,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1400417 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.039991006 = 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)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

Source

Library resources and technical services. 52(2008) no.3, S.148-163

0.010762642 = product of:
  0.04305057 = sum of:
    0.029504994 = weight(_text_:computer in 2422) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029504994 = score(doc=2422,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1461475 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6545093 = idf(docFreq=3109, maxDocs=44218)
          0.039991006 = queryNorm
        0.20188503 = fieldWeight in 2422, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.6545093 = idf(docFreq=3109, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2422)
    0.013545574 = product of:
      0.027091147 = sum of:
        0.027091147 = weight(_text_:22 in 2422) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027091147 = score(doc=2422,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1400417 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.039991006 = 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)
  0.25 = coord(2/8)

Series

Lecture notes in computer science; vol.2769

Source

Research and advanced technology for digital libraries : 7th European Conference, proceedings / ECDL 2003, Trondheim, Norway, August 17-22, 2003

0.010308346 = product of:
  0.082466766 = sum of:
    0.082466766 = sum of:
      0.04995739 = weight(_text_:resources in 4748) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04995739 = score(doc=4748,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.14598069 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
            0.039991006 = queryNorm
          0.34221917 = fieldWeight in 4748, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4748)
      0.032509375 = weight(_text_:22 in 4748) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.032509375 = score(doc=4748,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1400417 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.039991006 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4748, 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=4748)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

Metadata and information technology staff in libraries that are building digital collections typically extract and manipulate MARC metadata sets to provide access to digital content via non-MARC schemes. Metadata processing in these libraries involves defining the relationships between metadata schemes, moving metadata between schemes, and coordinating the intellectual activity and physical resources required to create and manipulate metadata. Actively managing the non-MARC metadata resources used to build digital collections is something most of these libraries have only begun to do. This article proposes strategies for managing MARC metadata repurposing efforts as the first step in a coordinated approach to library metadata management. Guided by lessons learned from Cornell University library mapping and transformation activities, the authors apply the literature of data resource management to library metadata management and propose a model for managing MARC metadata repurposing processes through the implementation of a metadata management design.

Source

Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2, S.144-152

0.010308346 = product of:
  0.082466766 = sum of:
    0.082466766 = sum of:
      0.04995739 = weight(_text_:resources in 302) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04995739 = score(doc=302,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.14598069 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
            0.039991006 = queryNorm
          0.34221917 = fieldWeight in 302, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=302)
      0.032509375 = weight(_text_:22 in 302) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.032509375 = score(doc=302,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1400417 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.039991006 = 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)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

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

Source

Library resources and technical services. 55(2011) no.1, S.17-32

0.009892544 = product of:
  0.07914035 = sum of:
    0.07914035 = sum of:
      0.041212745 = weight(_text_:resources in 6523) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.041212745 = score(doc=6523,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14598069 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
            0.039991006 = queryNorm
          0.28231642 = fieldWeight in 6523, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6523)
      0.037927605 = weight(_text_:22 in 6523) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.037927605 = score(doc=6523,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1400417 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.039991006 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 6523, 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=6523)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

Currently, few resources exist to guide libraries in the cataloguing of community information using the new USMARC Format for Cammunity Information (1993). In developing a community information database, Queens Borough Public Library, New York City, formulated their own cataloguing procedures for applying AACR2, LoC File Interpretations, and USMARC Format for Community Information to community information. Their practices include entering corporate names directly whenever possible and assigning LC subject headings for classes of persons and topics, adding neighbourhood level geographic subdivisions. The guidelines were specially designed to aid non cataloguers in cataloguing community information and have enabled library to maintain consistency in handling corporate names and in assigning subject headings, while creating database that is highly accessible to library staff and users

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 22(1996) no.2, S.51-69

0.009892544 = product of:
  0.07914035 = sum of:
    0.07914035 = sum of:
      0.041212745 = weight(_text_:resources in 2844) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.041212745 = score(doc=2844,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14598069 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
            0.039991006 = queryNorm
          0.28231642 = fieldWeight in 2844, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2844)
      0.037927605 = weight(_text_:22 in 2844) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.037927605 = score(doc=2844,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1400417 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.039991006 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2844, 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=2844)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

This paper will describe the way in which the USMARC cataloging schema is used at the Eisenhower National Clearing-house (ENC). Discussion will include how ENC MARC extensions were developed for cataloging mathematics and science curriculum resources, and how the ENC workflow is integrated into the cataloging interface. The discussion will conclude with a historical look at the in-house data transfer from ENC MARC to the current production of IEEE LOM XML encoding for record sharing and OAI compliance, required under the NSDL project guidelines.

Source

Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1, S.28-39

0.009892544 = product of:
  0.07914035 = sum of:
    0.07914035 = sum of:
      0.041212745 = weight(_text_:resources in 3844) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.041212745 = score(doc=3844,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14598069 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
            0.039991006 = queryNorm
          0.28231642 = fieldWeight in 3844, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3844)
      0.037927605 = weight(_text_:22 in 3844) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.037927605 = score(doc=3844,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1400417 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.039991006 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3844, 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=3844)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

The MARC Program of the Library of Congress, led during its formative years by the author of this entry, was a landmark in the history of automation. Technical procedures, standards, and formatting for the catalog record were experimented with and developed in modern form in this project. The project began when computers were mainframe, slow, and limited in storage. So little was known then about many aspects of automation of library information resources that the MARC project can be seen as a pioneering effort with immeasurable impact.

Date

27. 8.2011 14:22:53

0.008762858 = product of:
  0.07010286 = sum of:
    0.07010286 = weight(_text_:network in 6951) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07010286 = score(doc=6951,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17809492 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
          0.039991006 = queryNorm
        0.3936264 = fieldWeight in 6951, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6951)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

Paper presented at the International Symposium on Information Technology; Standards for biliographic control, Bangkok, Thailand, 4-8 Sept 89. Reviews the 3 formats for the international exchange of bibliographic data: UNIMARC, UNISIST Reference Manual, and UNESCO's Common Communication Format (CCF) and describes the origins, technical features and typical users for all 3 formats. Selection of the most appropriate format depends upon whether users participate in a library network, are employed by technical institutes, or need to exchange information with both types of organization

0.008479323 = product of:
  0.067834586 = sum of:
    0.067834586 = sum of:
      0.03532521 = weight(_text_:resources in 136) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03532521 = score(doc=136,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.14598069 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
            0.039991006 = queryNorm
          0.2419855 = fieldWeight in 136, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.650338 = idf(docFreq=3122, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=136)
      0.032509375 = weight(_text_:22 in 136) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.032509375 = score(doc=136,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1400417 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.039991006 = 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)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

Source

Library resources and technical services. 48(2004) no.2, S.130-143

0.0078062876 = product of:
  0.0624503 = sum of:
    0.0624503 = weight(_text_:computer in 3005) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0624503 = score(doc=3005,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.1461475 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.6545093 = idf(docFreq=3109, maxDocs=44218)
          0.039991006 = queryNorm
        0.42731008 = fieldWeight in 3005, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          3.6545093 = idf(docFreq=3109, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3005)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

Using new communication technologies libraries must face continuously new questions, possibilities and expectations. This study discusses library-related aspects of our electronic era and how computer-related data formats affect bibliographic dataprocessing to give a summary of the most important results. First bibliographic formats for the exchange of bibliographic and related information in the machine-readable form between different types of computer systems were created more than 30 years ago. The evolution of information technologies leads to the improvement of computer systems. In addition to the development of computers and media types Internet has a great influence on data structure as well. Since the introduction of MARC bibliographic format, technology of data exchange between computers and between different computer systems has reached a very sophisticated stage and has contributed to the creation of new standards in this field. Today libraries work with this new infrastructure that induces many challenges. One of the most significant challenges is moving from a relatively homogenous bibliographic environment to a diverse one. Despite these challenges such changes are achievable and necessary to exploit possibilities of new metadata and technologies like the Internet and XML (Extensible Markup Language). XML is an open standard, a universal language for data on the Web. XML is nearly six-years-old standard designed for the description and computer-based management of (semi)-structured data and structured texts. XML gives developers the power to deliver structured data from a wide variety of applications and it is also an ideal format from server-to-server transfer of structured data. XML also isn't limited for Internet use and is an especially valuable tool in the field of library. In fact, XML's main strength - organizing information - makes it perfect for exchanging data between different systems. Tools that work with the XML can be used to process XML records without incurring additional costs associated with one's own software development. In addition, XML is also a suitable format for library web services. The Department of Computer-related Graphic Design and Library and Information Sciences of Debrecen University launched the BDML (Bibliographic Description Markup Language) development project in order to standardize bibliogrphic description with the help of XML.

0.0076675005 = product of:
  0.061340004 = sum of:
    0.061340004 = weight(_text_:network in 4292) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.061340004 = score(doc=4292,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17809492 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
          0.039991006 = queryNorm
        0.3444231 = fieldWeight in 4292, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4533744 = idf(docFreq=1398, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4292)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

Die UNESCO vertreibt kostenfrei die Software Micro-ISIS für PCs. Zur Anwendung in kleinen Dokumentationseinrichtungen unter dem Dach des International Development Information Network (IDIN) wurde ein eigenes IDIN-Format geschaffen, das unter dieser Software eingesetzt werden kann. Besonders berücksichtigt sind dabei unselbständige Werke und die Sacherschließung mit Hilfe des 'OECD Macrothesaurus for Information Processing in the Field of Economic and Social Development'. Das Format ist abgeleitet vom 'Common Communication Format (CCF)', das ebenfalls im Auftrag der Unesco entwickelt wurde. IDIN ist eine vereinfachte Version und hat eine andere Behandlung mehrteiliger Werke