Search (35 results, page 1 of 2)

0.020113206 = product of:
  0.070396215 = sum of:
    0.015669605 = weight(_text_:based in 2188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015669605 = score(doc=2188,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11767787 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03905679 = queryNorm
        0.13315678 = fieldWeight in 2188, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2188)
    0.05472661 = weight(_text_:great in 2188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05472661 = score(doc=2188,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21992016 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03905679 = queryNorm
        0.24884763 = fieldWeight in 2188, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2188)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)

Abstract

This article focuses on the use of the German language subject headings authority file SWD (Schlagwortnormdatei) in Austria and outlines how Austrian academic libraries' employment of the SWD developed in active cooperation with their SWD partners. The Austrian subject indexing practice turned to the SWD terminology based on the newly published German subject indexing rules RSWK (Regeln für den Schlagwortkatalog) in the late 1980s. An electronic workflow was developed. Soon it became necessary to provide a data pool for new terms originally created by Austrian member libraries and to connect these data with the SWD source data (ÖSWD, 1991). Internal cooperation structures developed when local SWD editorial departments began to exist. As of 1994 a central editor was nominated to serve as direct link between active Austrian SWD users and SWD partners and the German National Library (DNB). Unfortunately the first active SWD period was followed by a long term vacancy due to the first central editor's early retirement. Nearly all functional and information structures stopped functioning while local data increased on a daily basis... In 2004 a new central ÖSWD editor was nominated, whose first task it was to rebuild structures, to motivate local editors as well as terminology experts in Austria, to create a communication network for exchanging information and to cooperate efficiently with the DNB and Austria's SWD partners. The great number of old data and term duplicates and the special role of personal names as subject authority data in the Austrian library system meant that newly created and older or reused terms had to be marked in a special way to allow for better segmentation and revision. Now, in 2008, the future of Austrian SWD use looks bright. Problems will continue to be overcome as the forthcoming new online editing process for authority files provides new challenges.

0.011727133 = product of:
  0.08208992 = sum of:
    0.08208992 = weight(_text_:great in 5666) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08208992 = score(doc=5666,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21992016 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03905679 = queryNorm
        0.37327147 = fieldWeight in 5666, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5666)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

This paper discusses the concept of "metadata" in the scope of the "digital library," two terms recently used in a great diversity of perspectives. It is not the intent to promote privilege of any particular view, but rather to help provide a better understanding of these multiple perspectives. The paper starts with a discussion of the concept of digital library, followed by an analysis of the concept of metadata. It continues with a discussion about the relationship of this concept with technology, services, and scenarios of application. The concluding remarks stress the three main arguments assumed for the relevance of the concept of metadata: the growing number of heterogeneous genres of information resources, the new emerging scenarios for interoperability, and issues related to the cost and complexity of current technology.

0.011727133 = product of:
  0.08208992 = sum of:
    0.08208992 = weight(_text_:great in 2195) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08208992 = score(doc=2195,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21992016 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03905679 = queryNorm
        0.37327147 = fieldWeight in 2195, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2195)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

«Current proposals for the future of the Web describe the use of ontologies for making the Web more intelligent for machine and automatic processing. The Virtual International Authority File (VIAF) could be one of the basic building blocks to a »semantic web« when combined with other controlled vocabularies and authority files from such sources as abstracting and indexing services, archives, museums, publishers, etc. Libraries now have an opportunity to make a great contribution to this future and should help make this vision a reality.« This article gives a status report on the VIAF, a cooperative project of the Library of Congress, the Bibliotheque nationale de France, OCLC and the German National Library.

0.00977261 = product of:
  0.068408266 = sum of:
    0.068408266 = weight(_text_:great in 5669) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.068408266 = score(doc=5669,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21992016 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03905679 = queryNorm
        0.31105953 = fieldWeight in 5669, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5669)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

Today's electronic catalogue makes retrieval of specific records very simple and quick in most (not all) cases, but searches aimed at the reliable retrieval of all material answering a well-defined need (author, work, theme, form, etc.) are still long and tiring, and sometimes impossible, in crowded bibliographic databases. In spite of its great relevance, authority control has been and still is the "poor relative" of cataloguing, the often neglected or overlooked "other half" if we compare it to the creation of bibliographic records. The FRBR study and the new authority control standards (GARR and UNIMARC Authorities) are important steps towards future perspectives. Even today, cataloguing codes do not make clear the difference between the access points for bibliographic records and the relationships (work-to-work, author-to-work, etc.) that are independent from spoecific publications. With the development of richer authority records and relationships, the bibliographic record might be relieved of information related to entities different from publications and of all the functions more suitably worked out upstream or downstream in access systems or by links to the images and/or the texts of the publications themselves. A "light" bibliographic record would no longer be the paramount component of library information systems; it would keep its central role rather as nimble, swift turntable between access and content organization systems and systems for management and display of digital resources themselves.

0.00977261 = product of:
  0.068408266 = sum of:
    0.068408266 = weight(_text_:great in 2186) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.068408266 = score(doc=2186,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21992016 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03905679 = queryNorm
        0.31105953 = fieldWeight in 2186, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2186)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

The University and Regional Library (ULB) of Münster in Westphalia indexes its documents since 1990 with Regeln für den Schlagwortkatalog (RSWK) and Schlagwortnormdatei (SWD), the German rules for subject indexing and its authority file. In this area the library profits from the regional and national cooperation, particularly from the German National Library's external services for new German publications. The ULB itself has to index primarily new foreign literature, for instance Dutch books within the scope of the special subject fields programme of the German Research Society (DFG), but also its numerous acquisitions of older books and collections. Also some retrospective conversion has been done in the field of subject cataloguing. In the ULB indexing is the task of the subject librarians. They are supported by a small local editorial staff which especially takes care of the subject catalogue management and cooperates with the North-Rhine Westphalian library network for academic libraries, HBZ in Cologne. Furthermore, in its function as the Regional Library of Westphalia the ULB indexes books and above all a great number of articles listed in the regional bibliography of North Rhine-Westphalia (NWBib). RSWK in Münster im Kontext regionaler und überregionaler Kooperation. - Entwicklung der Schlagwort-Kooperation und Fremddatennutzung. - Aktuelle Probleme und Potenziale der Schlagwort-Kooperation. - Eigenbeschlagwortete Literatur in der ULB Münster. - Schlagwortredaktion in der ULB Münster. - RSWK Erschließung in der Nordrhein-Westfälischen Bibliographie (NWBib). - Münsters Schlagworterschließung in der sachlichen Suche.

0.009376042 = product of:
  0.032816146 = sum of:
    0.019587006 = weight(_text_:based in 190) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019587006 = score(doc=190,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11767787 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03905679 = queryNorm
        0.16644597 = fieldWeight in 190, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=190)
    0.013229139 = product of:
      0.026458278 = sum of:
        0.026458278 = weight(_text_:22 in 190) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026458278 = score(doc=190,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13677022 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03905679 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 190, 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=190)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)

Abstract

Catalogers have become interdependent in their pursuit to provide bibliographic control and access. This interdependency has brought with it the need for greater agreement in applying common cataloging policies and rules. The expanded application of AACR2 (Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules) is fostering greater uniformity in the provision of bibliographic description and access. The rules have been translated into numerous languages and used in European, Middle Eastern, and Latin American countries. Cataloging committees and individual libraries in Europe and South Africa have expressed strong interest in adopting, adapting, or aligning with AACR2. PCC (Program for Cooperative Cataloguing) is one of the most successful cooperative cataloging efforts and has a considerable international component, which encourages the use of AACR, LCSH (Library of Congress Subject Headings), and MARC. AACR2 is successful on an international level because it is based in internationally developed standards, including ISBDs and the Paris Principles. ISBDs (International Standard Bibliographic Description) and the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records are examples of the contributions that IFLA (International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions) has made to the internationalization of cataloging. IFLA sponsored the international conference that resulted in the Paris Principles as well as subsequent projects to craft international policy in relation to uniform headings for persons, corporate bodies, and titles.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.006840827 = product of:
  0.047885787 = sum of:
    0.047885787 = weight(_text_:great in 5042) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.047885787 = score(doc=5042,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21992016 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03905679 = queryNorm
        0.21774168 = fieldWeight in 5042, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=5042)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

Testing on the syntactic component of the language is in progress, carried out by a team working on the basis of some terms of the Thesaurus which have been identified for possessing some special features. This will maybe lead to some changes and simplifications in the original structures coming from the GRIS model <http://wwwaib.it/aib/commiss/gris/ guida.htm> and the Feasibility Study. Within June 2006, two basic documents will be published: - a paper volume containing the Rules, concerning both terminology and syntax, explanations of the Thesaurus, criteria, choices made about the categories and the width of the semantic network, etc.; - a CD containing the Thesaurus. One side of great interest will be the c-learning process of the indexing language of the new Soggettario. This has to be undertaken only after the prototype stage is done. At that time, once the text of the Rules will have been published, it will be possible for the system to spread, to be learned, and to be tested by various indexers and partners.

0.004535705 = product of:
  0.031749934 = sum of:
    0.031749934 = product of:
      0.06349987 = sum of:
        0.06349987 = weight(_text_:22 in 6888) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06349987 = score(doc=6888,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13677022 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03905679 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 6888, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6888)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Date

26.12.2011 12:30:22

0.004535705 = product of:
  0.031749934 = sum of:
    0.031749934 = product of:
      0.06349987 = sum of:
        0.06349987 = weight(_text_:22 in 131) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06349987 = score(doc=131,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13677022 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03905679 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 131, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=131)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Content

Vortrag anlässlich des Workshops: "Extending the multilingual capacity of The European Library in the EDL project Stockholm, Swedish National Library, 22-23 November 2007".

0.004535705 = product of:
  0.031749934 = sum of:
    0.031749934 = product of:
      0.06349987 = sum of:
        0.06349987 = weight(_text_:22 in 1266) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06349987 = score(doc=1266,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13677022 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03905679 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 1266, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1266)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Content

Vortrag anlässlich des Workshops: "Extending the multilingual capacity of The European Library in the EDL project Stockholm, Swedish National Library, 22-23 November 2007".

0.004535705 = product of:
  0.031749934 = sum of:
    0.031749934 = product of:
      0.06349987 = sum of:
        0.06349987 = weight(_text_:22 in 1290) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06349987 = score(doc=1290,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13677022 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03905679 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 1290, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1290)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Content

Vortrag anlässlich des Workshops: "Extending the multilingual capacity of The European Library in the EDL project Stockholm, Swedish National Library, 22-23 November 2007".

0.00447703 = product of:
  0.03133921 = sum of:
    0.03133921 = weight(_text_:based in 5475) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03133921 = score(doc=5475,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11767787 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03905679 = queryNorm
        0.26631355 = fieldWeight in 5475, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5475)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

This paper compares the difference between approaches to defining database quality in cataloging and in online databases. Authority control is a solution created by catalogers to ensure that access points are both collocated and differentiated in a library catalog. This time consuming and costly method of quality control is used by catalogers based on the principle that the quality of individual cataloging records determines the success rate for user searching the library catalog. The principle is not shared by creators of online databases, who universally prefer speed to uniformity and standardization of access points.

0.0039174017 = product of:
  0.02742181 = sum of:
    0.02742181 = weight(_text_:based in 2976) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02742181 = score(doc=2976,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11767787 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03905679 = queryNorm
        0.23302436 = fieldWeight in 2976, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2976)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

Neither the standards nor the software underlying institutional repositories anticipated performing name authority control on widely disparate metadata from highly unreliable sources. Without it, though, both machines and humans are stymied in their efforts to access and aggregate information by author. Many organizations are awakening to the problems and possibilities of name authority control, but without better coordination, their efforts will only confuse matters further. Local heuristics-based name-disambiguation software may help those repository managers who can implement it. For the time being, however, most repository managers can only control their own name lists as best they can after deposit while they advocate for better systems and services.

0.0033577727 = product of:
  0.023504408 = sum of:
    0.023504408 = weight(_text_:based in 5662) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023504408 = score(doc=5662,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11767787 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03905679 = queryNorm
        0.19973516 = fieldWeight in 5662, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5662)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

Defines authority control and vocabulary control and their place and utility in modern cataloguing. Discusses authority records and authority files and the use and purposes of each. Describes the creation of authority records and the sources from which authority data is collected. Discusses "metadata" schemes and their manifold and manifest inadequacies; points out the relationship of the Dublin Core to the MARC family of standards and the fact that both are framework standards-the first simplistic and naïve, the second complex and nuanced. Defines precision and recall as desiderata in indexing and retrieval schemes and relates them to authority control in catalogues. Discusses the problems involved in cataloguing electronic documents and resources and proposes an international program under the Universal Bibliographic Control (UBC) umbrella, using an international code of descriptive cataloguing, and based on an international name authority file. Calls for urgent action on these proposals.

0.0033577727 = product of:
  0.023504408 = sum of:
    0.023504408 = weight(_text_:based in 5674) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023504408 = score(doc=5674,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11767787 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03905679 = queryNorm
        0.19973516 = fieldWeight in 5674, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5674)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

The project of the renewal of the Subject Headings for Italian Library Catalogues (Soggettario), financed by the National Central Library in Florence, proposes a pre-coordinated language, both analytic and synthetic, complying with international rules on vocabulary control and structure, based on category analysis of semantic relationships. It envisages a strict distinction between semantic relationships and syntactic ones, and bases its citation order of subject strings on the analysis model for logical relationships. Thanks to its features, the new Soggettario agrees both with the logic of Guidelines for Subject Authority and Reference Entries and of UNIMARC. Authorities, and with FRBR (Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records). The rigorous structure of the thesaurus will facilitate the transfer of controlled terminology to lists or authority files and archives. The Italian National Bibliography (BNI) will have to play a leading role on the control of coherence of semantic access points. It will validate the strings created by other libraries and control their coherence according to the syntax rules envisaged in the new method.

0.0033577727 = product of:
  0.023504408 = sum of:
    0.023504408 = weight(_text_:based in 2978) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023504408 = score(doc=2978,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11767787 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03905679 = queryNorm
        0.19973516 = fieldWeight in 2978, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2978)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

To date, the library literature has overflowed with articles on the theory and application of the FRBR conceptual model, but little has been written about its counterpart for authorities: the Functional Requirements for Authority Data conceptual model (FRAD). A few discussions of the theory of FRAD have been written by Glenn Patton and members of the FRANAR Working Group, but nothing has been documented yet about its application real authority files. The following article addresses this gap in the literature by analyzing the FRAD conceptual model, examining its applicability to an authority file for manuscripts, and proposing a way to implement and display this entity-relationship model in a local authority file. The usefulness of this FRAD-based authority file in cataloging manuscripts is evaluated and presented.

0.0031657384 = product of:
  0.022160169 = sum of:
    0.022160169 = weight(_text_:based in 1160) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022160169 = score(doc=1160,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.11767787 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03905679 = queryNorm
        0.18831211 = fieldWeight in 1160, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1160)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

This paper is the second in a series in D-Lib Magazine and describes a workflow management system being developed by the Digital Knowledge Center (DKC) at the Milton S. Eisenhower Library (MSEL) of The Johns Hopkins University. Based on experience from digitizing the Lester S. Levy Collection of Sheet Music, it was apparent that large-scale digitization efforts require a significant amount of human labor that is both time-consuming and costly. Consequently, this workflow management system aims to reduce the amount of human labor and time for large-scale digitization projects. The mission of this second phase of the project ("Levy II") can be summarized as follows: * Reduce costs for large collection ingestion by creating a suite of open-source processes, tools, and interfaces for workflow management * Increase access capabilities by providing a suite of research tools * Demonstrate utility of tools and processes with a subset of the online Levy Collection The cornerstones of the workflow management system include optical music recognition (OMR) software and an automated name authority control system (ANAC). The OMR software generates a logical representation of the score for sound generation, music searching, and musicological research. The ANAC disambiguates names, associating each name with an individual (e.g., the composer Septimus Winner also published under the pseudonyms Alice Hawthorne and Apsley Street, among others). Complementing the workflow tools, a suite of research tools focuses upon enhanced searching capabilities through the development and application of a fast, disk-based search engine for lyrics and music and the incorporation of an XML structure for metadata. The first paper (Choudhury et al. 2001) described the OMR software and musical components of Levy II. This paper focuses on the metadata and intellectual access components that include automated name authority control and the aforementioned search engine.

0.0030238035 = product of:
  0.021166623 = sum of:
    0.021166623 = product of:
      0.042333245 = sum of:
        0.042333245 = weight(_text_:22 in 249) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042333245 = score(doc=249,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13677022 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03905679 = 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)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.0030238035 = product of:
  0.021166623 = sum of:
    0.021166623 = product of:
      0.042333245 = sum of:
        0.042333245 = weight(_text_:22 in 4594) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042333245 = score(doc=4594,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13677022 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03905679 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4594, 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=4594)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Date

16. 7.2011 11:54:22

0.002798144 = product of:
  0.019587006 = sum of:
    0.019587006 = weight(_text_:based in 5922) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019587006 = score(doc=5922,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11767787 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03905679 = queryNorm
        0.16644597 = fieldWeight in 5922, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0129938 = idf(docFreq=5906, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5922)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

Authority control of Spanish-language subject headings is described, with a special focus on Mexico. Efforts currently underway in Colombia, Chile, Spain and Mexico, although they share the same language, are somewhat lacking in standardization and cooperation among countries. In the absence of a national authority for bibliographic control in Mexico, a group of university libraries has initiated a cooperative project to build in the near future a national file of Spanish subject headings for the Social Sciences. The project, based upon the experience and rich collections of El Colegio de Mexico, has attracted support from the U.S. Library of Congress and is being partially financed by the U.S.-Mexican Fund for Culture (sponsored by the Rockefeller and Bancomer Foundations). The paper mentions some of the difficulties found in translating LCSH, which is the main resource for the project. These difficulties can include semantics, syndetic structure, or pragmatic problems; most have been solved by supplementing the LCSH with Spanish-language subject heading lists or thesauri