Search (18 results, page 1 of 1)

0.007923828 = product of:
  0.06339063 = sum of:
    0.06339063 = weight(_text_:libraries in 2175) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06339063 = score(doc=2175,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.13017908 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.4869494 = fieldWeight in 2175, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2175)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

Describes the experience of data conversion and migration at the libraries of the Home Office (HO) and the Dept. of the Environment (DoE), UK. Both HO and DoE libraries had changed from Anglo-American code cataloguing to AACR2 cataloguing in the mid-1970s. Both libraries were selective in identifying records for conversion initially to BLAISE-LOCAS. Conversion to integrated library systems from BLAISE-LOCAS MARC tapes produced problems in both libraries with location/holdings fields which were largely resolved at HO, but not resolved at DoE. HO experienced problems converting to a system with fixed field lengths. HO converted subject keywords to form a rudimentary, non-standard thesaurus which required the addition of Broader Term and Narrower Term to meet the challenge of computerized searching. DoE converted a non-thesaurus subject index to an authority file, but continued to maintain the index on a stand-alone DataEase application for use by cataloguers. Neither library converted acquisitions data

0.007160733 = product of:
  0.057285864 = sum of:
    0.057285864 = weight(_text_:libraries in 557) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.057285864 = score(doc=557,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.13017908 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.4400543 = fieldWeight in 557, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=557)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

A sample was taken of the name and title provisional, or minimal level, authority records created by Blackwell North America, Inc., during its authority control processing in preparation for the implementation of NOTIS at the State Univerity of New York at Buffalo Libraries. Analysis of the sample showed that approximately 10 % of theses provisional records were created unnecessarily, while approximately 7 % had Library of Congress Name Authority File recordsestablished since the vendor's work was completed. The remaining 83 %, which will require original authority work in order to be upgraded to 'full' status, are categorized in such a manner as to determine the best approach to achieving the libraries' goal of absolute authority control.

0.007160733 = product of:
  0.057285864 = sum of:
    0.057285864 = weight(_text_:libraries in 5801) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.057285864 = score(doc=5801,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.13017908 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.4400543 = fieldWeight in 5801, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5801)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

Some international libraries are still using the Anglo-American Cataloging Rules, 2nd edition revised, for cataloging even though the Library of Congress and other large libraries have retired it in favor of Resource Description and Access. One of these libraries is the National Library of Greece, which consults the Library of Congress database before establishing authorities. There are cultural differences in names and subjects between the Library of Congress and the National Library, but some National Library terms may be more appropriate for users than the Library of Congress-established forms.

0.0058467137 = product of:
  0.04677371 = sum of:
    0.04677371 = weight(_text_:libraries in 2619) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04677371 = score(doc=2619,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.13017908 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.35930282 = fieldWeight in 2619, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2619)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

To investigate which authority data elements are recorded by libraries in the Chinese character cultural sphere (e.g., Japan, Mainland China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, South Korea, and Vietnam), data elements recorded by each library were examined and compared to authority data elements defined in the standard Resource Description and Access (RDA) design. Recommendations were then made to libraries within this cultural sphere to improve and internationally standardize their authority data. In addition, suggestions are provided to modify RDA in an effort to increase compatibility with authority data in the Chinese character cultural sphere.

0.0058467137 = product of:
  0.04677371 = sum of:
    0.04677371 = weight(_text_:libraries in 698) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04677371 = score(doc=698,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.13017908 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.35930282 = fieldWeight in 698, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=698)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

The concept of authorship is central to how libraries organize their collections. But libraries do not only collect resources created by individuals, they also collect documents issued by organizations. Library catalogers use the concept of a "corporate body" to treat organizations as authors for the purpose of making their documents discoverable to users. This essay looks at the key features of establishing authorized access points (AAPs) and applying authority control for corporate bodies. It examines how practices with regard to corporate bodies have changed over time and considers the changes catalogers might expect to see in the future.

0.00522842 = product of:
  0.04182736 = sum of:
    0.04182736 = weight(_text_:studies in 5665) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04182736 = score(doc=5665,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15812531 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.26452032 = fieldWeight in 5665, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9902744 = idf(docFreq=2222, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5665)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

In its role as a national bibliographic agency, the Bibliografia Nazionale Italiana (BNI) has never been in a position to fulfill what should be one of its main functions: authority control. Despite the creation of various committees, studies, and projects, and the close relationship between the BNI and the Servizio Bibliotecario Nazionale (SBN), no plan of action with regard to authority control, whether shared or developed in consultation, has been produced to date. Recently, a significant result was achieved: the specification of the new BNI/UNIMARC database, structured according to authority control principles. And in collaboration with the Region of Tuscany, a project for control of access points destined for the users and librarians of that region is in progress, providing the opportunity to initiate the systematic control of BNI access points. The BNI is now in a position to begin to realize the first objective recommended by the IFLA Working Group on an International Authority System more than twenty years ago: to establish authority headings, including cross-references, for its bibliographic records.

0.0041342513 = product of:
  0.03307401 = sum of:
    0.03307401 = weight(_text_:libraries in 1884) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03307401 = score(doc=1884,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13017908 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.25406548 = fieldWeight in 1884, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1884)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

This article shares a vision of the enterprise of cataloging and the role of catalogers and metadata librarians in the twenty-first century. The revolutionary opportunities now presented by Semantic Web technologies liberate catalogers from their historically analog-based static world, re-conceptualize it, and transform it into a world of high dimensionality and fluidity. By presenting illustrative examples of innovative metadata creation and manipulation, such as non-MARC name authority records, we seek to contribute to the libraries' mission with innovative projects that enable discovery, development, communication, learning, and creativity, and hold promise to exceed users' expectations.

0.0041342513 = product of:
  0.03307401 = sum of:
    0.03307401 = weight(_text_:libraries in 1939) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03307401 = score(doc=1939,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13017908 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.25406548 = fieldWeight in 1939, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1939)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

This article describes the project to build the initial International Standard Name Identifier (ISNI) database by deploying the techniques used to develop the Virtual International Authority File (VIAF). It focuses particularly on the work of the OCLC team in transforming the VIAF "resource file" model of matched data into a robust, operational, and authoritative file of uniquely assigned ISNIs as a base for an ongoing ISNI assignment system, and on the quality assurance validation of the database provided by the British Library and the Bibliothèque nationale de France. The need for future interaction between ongoing ISNI assignment and name authority control in libraries is also explored.

0.0035436437 = product of:
  0.02834915 = sum of:
    0.02834915 = weight(_text_:libraries in 5341) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02834915 = score(doc=5341,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13017908 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.2177704 = fieldWeight in 5341, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5341)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

In 1996, a study was undertaken at the University of Arkansas Libraries to evaluate the practice of front-end authority work for monographs copy cataloging. A sample of 283 name headings originating from Library of Congress, OCLC "Enhance" member, and general member copy was examined, and analysis revealed that 47.3 percent of headings correctly matched authority records already present in the library's local file. Another 41.3 percent exactly matched records in the OCLC authority file. These findings prompted the library to cease checking name headings at the point of cataloging. However, the level of inaccuracies present, combined with the value of authority records for cross-reference and note information, ensured that the Database Maintenance Unit would continue to review local headings reports and perform needed authority work.

0.0035436437 = product of:
  0.02834915 = sum of:
    0.02834915 = weight(_text_:libraries in 5667) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02834915 = score(doc=5667,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13017908 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.2177704 = fieldWeight in 5667, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5667)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

Forty years ago the ICCP in Paris laid the foundations of international co-operation in descriptive cataloging without explicitly speaking of authority control. Some of the factors in the evolution of authority control are the development of catalogs (from card catalog to local automation, to today's OPAC on the Web) and services provided by libraries (from individual service to local users to system networks, to the World Wide Web), as well as international agreements on cataloging (from Paris Principles to the UBC programme, to the report on Mandatory data elements for internationally shared resource authority records). This evolution progressed from the principle of uniform heading to the definition of authority entries and records, and from the responsibility of national bibliographic agencies for the form of the names of their own authors to be shared internationally to the concept of authorized equivalent heading. Some issues of the present state are the persisting differences among national rules and the aim of respecting both local culture and language and international readability.

0.0033409793 = product of:
  0.026727835 = sum of:
    0.026727835 = weight(_text_:libraries in 3876) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026727835 = score(doc=3876,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.13017908 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.2053159 = fieldWeight in 3876, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3876)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

Every standard embodies a particular set of values. Some aspects are privileged while others are masked. Values embedded within knowledge organization standards have special import in that they are further perpetuated by the data they are used to generate. Within libraries, descriptive catalog codes serve as prominent knowledge organization standards, guiding the creation of resource representations. Though the historical and functional aspects of these standards have received significant attention, less focus has been placed on the values associated with such codes. In this study, a critical, historical analysis of ten Anglo-American descriptive catalog codes and surrounding discourse was conducted as an initial step towards uncovering key values associated with this lineage of standards. Two values in particular were found to be highly significant: authority and universalism. Authority is closely tied to notions of power and control, particularly over practice or belief. Increasing control over resources, identities, and viewpoints are all manifestations of the value of authority within descriptive codes. Universalism has guided the widening coverage of descriptive codes in regards to settings and materials, such as the extension of bibliographic standards to non-book resources. Together, authority and universalism represent conventional values focused on facilitating orderly social exchanges. A comparative lack of emphasis on values concerning human welfare and empowerment may be unsurprising, but raises questions concerning the role of human values in knowledge organization standards. Further attention to the values associated with descriptive codes and other knowledge organization standards is important as libraries and other institutions seek to share their resource representation data more widely

0.0029530365 = product of:
  0.023624292 = sum of:
    0.023624292 = weight(_text_:libraries in 2506) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023624292 = score(doc=2506,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13017908 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.18147534 = fieldWeight in 2506, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2506)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Content

This paper looks at approaches to name authority control in repository contexts and describes the work of the Names project, which has been funded to investigate issues surrounding the identification of individuals and institutions within repositories of research outputs in the United Kingdom. The problem of uniquely identifying authors has been with us ever since books have been catalogued. National libraries have been creating name authority files for authors of books for many years, starting with card catalogues and now maintaining electronic files in MARC format. However, authority files for the creators of journal articles do not tend to exist in library systems. The increasing use of subject-based and institutional repositories to hold working papers, reports, research data, and pre-refereed and post-referred versions of articles has led to a corresponding rise in the number of authors identified in such systems. Without having a means of uniquely and unambiguously identifying the creators of materials in repositories, it becomes difficult to be sure whether all the materials related to a particular author will be correctly associated with that individual. Names of authors may be entered in more than one way, or more than one author may have exactly the same name. This article looks at recent attempts to address this problem in the repository environment and goes on to explain the approach that is planned to be taken in the Names project.

0.0029530365 = product of:
  0.023624292 = sum of:
    0.023624292 = weight(_text_:libraries in 2288) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023624292 = score(doc=2288,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13017908 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.18147534 = fieldWeight in 2288, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2288)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

Bibliographic data is used to describe resources held in the collections of libraries, archives and museums. That data is mostly available on the Web today and mostly as linked data. Also on the Web are the controlled vocabulary systems of name authority files, like the Virtual International Authority File (VIAF), classification systems, and subject terms. These systems offer their own linked data to potentially help users find the information they want - whether at their local library or anywhere in the world that is willing to make their resources available. We have found it beneficial to merge authority data for names on a global level, as the entities are relatively clear. That is not true for subject concepts and terminology that have categorisation systems developed according to varying principles and schemes and are in multiple languages. Rather than requiring everyone in the world to use the same categorisation/classification system in the same language, we know that the Web offers us the opportunity to add descriptors assigned around the world using multiple systems from multiple perspectives to identify our resources. Those descriptors add value to refine searches, help users worldwide and share globally what each library does locally.

0.0016778135 = product of:
  0.013422508 = sum of:
    0.013422508 = product of:
      0.026845016 = sum of:
        0.026845016 = weight(_text_:22 in 191) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026845016 = score(doc=191,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13876937 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 191, 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=191)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.0016778135 = product of:
  0.013422508 = sum of:
    0.013422508 = product of:
      0.026845016 = sum of:
        0.026845016 = weight(_text_:22 in 3041) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026845016 = score(doc=3041,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13876937 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3041, 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=3041)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Date

22. 8.2009 13:11:01

0.0014765182 = product of:
  0.011812146 = sum of:
    0.011812146 = weight(_text_:libraries in 3691) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011812146 = score(doc=3691,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13017908 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.09073767 = fieldWeight in 3691, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=3691)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Content

Mit großer Spannung wurde der Vortrag von Elisabeth Niggemann und Reiner Diedrichs über das weitere Vorgehen nach Abschluss des Projekts »Umstieg auf internationale Formate und Regelwerke (MARC21, AACR2)« erwartet. Unter dem programmatischen Titel »Hinter dem Horizont geht es weiter« stellten der Vorsitzende der Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Verbundsysteme und die Generaldirektorin Der Deutschen Bibliothek vor, wie die Internationalisierung der deutschen Standards im Einzelnen aussehen soll, und welche Maßnahmen erforderlich sind. Die Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Verbundsysteme hatte in ihrer Herbstsitzung 2004 verschiedene Beschlüsse getroffen, welche die Zusammenarbeit der Verbundsysteme fördern und erleichtern sollen. Dazu gehören u. a. die Entwicklung eines prototypischen Verfahrens für einen Neukatalogisierungsdienst mit einheitlichen Datenstrukturen und einheitlichen Formatanwendungen, die Verwendung von MARC21 als einheitlichem Austauschformat und die Entwicklung eines Matchkey-Verfahrens zur verbundübergreifenden Titelerkennung. Außerdem wurden grundsätzliche Anforderungen an das künftige Regelwerk und für eine Reorganisation der Normdatenarbeit formuliert, die die Ziele der Arbeitsgemeinschaft effektiv unterstützen sollen. Der Standardisierungsausschuss hat diese Beschlüsse in seiner 9. Sitzung im Dezember 2004 begrüßt, bestätigt und konkretisiert. Nun gilt es, die Beschlüsse zügig umzusetzen, um die gesteckten Ziele zu verfolgen: einfacher Zugang zu bibliografischer Information national wie international für wissenschaftliche und andere persönliche Nutzer, leichte Austauschbarkeit von bibliografischer Information zwischen professionellen Benutzergruppen und Anwendern und last but not least Kostenreduktion bei der Erschließung. Im Anschluss stellte Renate Gömpel, Die Deutsche Bibliothek, die IFLA-CDNL Allianz für Bibliografische Standards (ICABS) vor, die während des Weltkongresses Bibliothek und Information in Berlin als ein neues strategisches Vorhaben ins Leben gerufen wurde. Mit ICABS streben die National Library of Australia, die Library of Congress, die British Library, die Koninklijke Bibliotheek der Niederlande und Die Deutsche Bibliothek gemeinsam mit der Biblioteca Nacional Portugals, der IFLA und der Conference of Directors of National Libraries (CDNL) die Fortsetzung und Unterstützung von Schlüsselaktivitäten im Bereich der bibliografischen und der Ressourcenkontrolle sowie damit zusammenhängender Formatstandards an. Die Allianz führt damit die Arbeit der Geschäftsstellen der früheren IFLA-Kernprogramme UBCIM (Universal Bibliographic Control and International MARC) und UDT (Universal Dataflow and Telecommunications) fort. In dem Vortrag wurde ein Überblick über Ziele und Vorhaben von ICABS, ihre Organisation sowie deren Arbeit als Dach für facettenreiche Aktivitäten im Bereich bibliografischer Standards gegeben. Koordiniert wird die Arbeit von ICABS durch das Advisory Board, das aus Vertretern aller beteiligten Institutionen und Organisationen besteht und dessen Vorsitz gegenwärtig ebenso wie das Sekretariat bei Der Deutschen Bibliothek angesiedelt ist. Der Standardisierungsausschuss hat bereits erste Planungen für eine Veranstaltung beim 95. Deutschen Bibliothekartag in Dresden angestellt. Dort soll über den Stand der Internationalisierung des deutschen Regelwerks, den Umstieg auf MARC21 und die Weiterentwicklung der Normdateien berichtet werden. Darüber hinaus erwartet die Teilnehmerinnen und Teilnehmer ein Bericht aus dem Joint Steering Committee for Revision of Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules (JSC) über den Stand der AACR3. Es wird sicherlich spannend, merken Sie sich diesen Termin vor."

0.0014765182 = product of:
  0.011812146 = sum of:
    0.011812146 = weight(_text_:libraries in 2317) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011812146 = score(doc=2317,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13017908 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03962768 = queryNorm
        0.09073767 = fieldWeight in 2317, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.2850544 = idf(docFreq=4499, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=2317)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Abstract

Der 74. Weltkongress der International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA) hat vom 10. bis 14. August 2008 unter dem Motto "Libraries without borders: Navigating towards global understanding" in Quebec, Kanada, stattgefunden. Dort trafen sich mehr als 3000 Bibliothekarinnen und Bibliothekare aus 150 Ländern der Welt zu insgesamt 224 Veranstaltungen und verschiedenen Satellitenkonferenzen. Die IFLA-Präsidentin Prof. Dr. Claudia Lux aus Berlin leitete die Tagung und war gleichzeitig prominenteste Vertreterin der deutschen Delegation, die aus mehr als 80 Kolleginnen und Kollegen bestand und damit im Vergleich zum Vorjahr erfreulich groß war. Wer nicht dabei sein konnte und sich dennoch einen Eindruck über die Konferenz und die Atmosphäre verschaffen möchte, kann dies online tun. Neben dem Programm und einer Vielzahl von Vorträgen sind auf der Website der IFLA auch Links zu Fotos, Videos und Blogs vorhanden. Innerhalb der IFLA wird derzeit an einer Neuorganisation und damit verbunden einer neuen Satzung gearbeitet, unter anderem sollen auch der interne und externe Informationsfluss verbessert werden. Dazu soll Anfang 2009 eine neu gestaltete Website mit einem Content Managementsystem frei geschaltet werden. Das Design der neuen Site wurde in Quebec vorgestellt, eine Präsentation ist im IFLAnet zu finden. Wie in den vergangenen Jahren soll auch in diesem Jahr über die Veranstaltungen der Division IV Bibliographic Control mit ihren Sektionen Bibliography, Cataloguing, Classification and Indexing sowie Knowledge Managament berichtet werden.

0.0011863933 = product of:
  0.009491147 = sum of:
    0.009491147 = product of:
      0.018982293 = sum of:
        0.018982293 = weight(_text_:22 in 632) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.018982293 = score(doc=632,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.13876937 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03962768 = queryNorm
            0.13679022 = fieldWeight in 632, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=632)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.125 = coord(1/8)

Content

MARC21 als Austauschformat Die Expertengruppe Datenformate hat in ihrer 5. Sitzung am 22. November 2005 die Frage der Hierarchienabbildung bei der Übernahme von MARC 21 weiter diskutiert und einer Lösung zugeführt. Für einen geringen Prozentsatz der Daten werden trotz Vorarbeiten der Expertengruppe Probleme bei der Überführung von MARC-21-Daten in MAB2-Strukturen gesehen. Es wurde darauf hingewiesen, dass es im Zusammenhang mit dem Umstieg auf MARC 21 ebenso wie bei der kooperativen Katalogisierung notwendig ist, gemeinsame Regeln festzulegen und Absprachen zwischen den Verbünden zu treffen. Eine unterschiedliche Handhabung des Formats sollte sich von vornherein verbieten. Projekt Kooperative Neukatalogisierung Die Projektgruppe hat zweimal getagt, zuletzt am 3. November 2005. Es liegen erste Ergebnisse vor, und spätestens Anfang Januar 2006 soll das Verfahren erprobt werden. Alle Verbünde signalisieren ihr Interesse an dem geplanten Verfahren, da die Eigenkatalogisierungsrate nach wie vor zu hoch ist. Für die Akzeptanz des Dienstes, der auch zum Synchronisieren der vorhandenen Aufnahmen und zum Austausch von Sacherschließungsdaten genutzt werden soll, ist die Aktualität des geplanten Neukatalogisierungspools essentiell. Ein weiteres Ziel ist auch die Optimierung der Arbeitsabläufe zwischen Verbundzentrale und Bibliotheken. Catalogue Enrichment Zur Anreicherung der Katalogdaten gibt es verschiedene Aktivitäten innerhalb der Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Verbundsysteme, die koordiniert werden müssen, damit eine Mehrfachdigitalisierung von Inhaltsverzeichnissen, Abstracts und anderen Objekten vermieden werden kann. Die Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Verbundsysteme beschließt, eine kleine Arbeitsgruppe einzusetzen, die bis spätestens Anfang Februar 2006 einen Vorschlag mit unterschiedlichen Szenarien für unterschiedliche Umgebungen vorlegen soll. Aufgabe der AG Datenanreicherung ist die Konzeption eines schnellen Dienstes für die Digitalisierung von Abstracts und Inhaltsverzeichnissen sofern sie lizenzrechtlich frei verfügbar sind, die allen Verbünden zur Verfügung gestellt werden sollen. Dazu gehören eine Übersicht über die vorhandenen Daten und eine ausgearbeitete Verfahrensvorschrift für das künftige Vorgehen.
DDC/Melvil-Nutzungs- und Lizenzsituation Die Deutsche Bibliothek hat den Dienst Melvil vorgestellt, der auf der im Rahmen des Projektes DDC Deutsch erstellten deutschen Übersetzung der 22. Ausgabe der DDC basiert, und die Such- und Sprachgewohnheiten deutschsprachiger Benutzerinnen und Benutzer berücksichtigt. Mit Melvil wurde ein Online-Dienst entwickelt, der Bibliotheken und Informationseinrichtungen außer einem an WebDewey orientierten Klassifikationstool MelvilClass auch ein Retrievaltool MelvilSearch für die verbale Suche nach DDC-erschlossenen Dokumenten und das Browsing in der DDC-Hierarchie zur Verfügung stellt. Über die Schnittstelle MelvilSoap können Bibliotheken und Verbundzentralen, die den Dienst Melvil lizenziert haben, auch DDC-Daten zur weiteren Nutzung herunterladen. Gegenwärtig vergibt Die Deutsche Bibliothek Testlizenzen, ab 2006 kann der Dienst nach einem gestaffelten Modell kostenpflichtig genutzt werden Ergebnisse der Adhoc-Arbeitsgruppe ISBD(CR) Der Standardisierungsausschuss hatte in seiner 9. Sitzung am 15. Dezember 2004 die Anpassung der Splitregeln bei fortlaufenden Sammelwerken an die ISBD(CR) mit dem Ziel der Übernahme beschlossen. Im Januar 2005 richtete die Arbeitsstelle für Standardisierung eine Ad-hoc-AG ISBD(CR) ein, in der Vertreter der ZDB, der Expertengruppe Formalerschließung und der AGDBT (Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Datenbankteilnehmer der ZDB) unter der Federführung der Arbeitsstelle für Standardisierung zusammenarbeiteten. Auftragsgemäß konnte dem Standardisierungsausschuss am 2. August 2005 ein entscheidungsreifer Entwurf zur Anwendung der ISBD(CR)-Splitregeln für fortlaufende Sammelwerke vorgelegt werden. Die Unterlage, die dem Standardisierungsausschuss zu seiner 11. Sitzung am 1. Dezember 2005 zugeleitet wurde, wurde den Mitgliedern der Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Verbundsysteme im Vorfeld der Sitzung zur Kenntnis gegeben. Die zeitnahe Anwendung der ISBD(CR)-Splitregeln würde nicht nur in einem kleinen abgeschlossenen Bereich eine Angleichung an internationale Gepflogenheiten bedeuten, sondern sie hätte auch einige positive Auswirkungen auf die von Zeitschriftentiteln abhängigen ergänzenden Dienstleistungen. So würde z.B. die Verlinkung mit SFX-Diensten erheblich erleichtert."