Search (46 results, page 1 of 3)

  • × theme_ss:"Formalerschließung"
  • × theme_ss:"Datenformate"
  1. Coyle, K.: Future considerations : the functional library systems record (2004) 0.02
    0.02014326 = product of:
      0.08057304 = sum of:
        0.06319319 = sum of:
          0.028117962 = weight(_text_:system in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.028117962 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.10100432 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
                0.032069415 = queryNorm
              0.27838376 = fieldWeight in 562, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=562)
          0.03507523 = weight(_text_:29 in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.03507523 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.11281017 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
                0.032069415 = queryNorm
              0.31092256 = fieldWeight in 562, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=562)
        0.017379852 = product of:
          0.034759704 = sum of:
            0.034759704 = weight(_text_:22 in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.034759704 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.112301625 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.032069415 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 562, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=562)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(2/8)
    
    Abstract
    The paper performs a thought experiment on the concept of a record based on the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records and library system functions, and concludes that if we want to develop a functional bibliographic record we need to do it within the context of a flexible, functional library systems record structure. The article suggests a new way to look at the library systems record that would allow libraries to move forward in terms of technology but also in terms of serving library users.
    Date
    9.12.2005 19:21:29
    Source
    Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2, S.166-174
  2. Leazer, G.H.: ¬A conceptual schema for the control of bibliographic works (1994) 0.01
    0.011909999 = product of:
      0.047639996 = sum of:
        0.032420702 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3033) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032420702 = score(doc=3033,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.09700725 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032069415 = queryNorm
            0.33420905 = fieldWeight in 3033, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3033)
        0.015219294 = product of:
          0.030438587 = sum of:
            0.030438587 = weight(_text_:system in 3033) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.030438587 = score(doc=3033,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.10100432 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.032069415 = queryNorm
                0.30135927 = fieldWeight in 3033, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3033)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(2/8)
    
    Abstract
    In this paper I describe a conceptual design of a bibliographic retrieval system that enables more thourough control of bibliographic entities. A bibliographic entity has 2 components: the intellectual work and the physical item. Users searching bibliographic retrieval systems generally do not search for a specific item, but are willing to retrieve one of several alternative manifestations of a work. However, contemporary bibliographic retrieval systems are based solely on the descriptions of items. Works are described only implcitly by collocating descriptions of items. This method has resulted in a tool that does not include important descriptive attributes of the work, e.g. information regarding its history, its genre, or its bibliographic relationships. A bibliographic relationship is an association between 2 bibliographic entities. A system evaluation methodology wasused to create a conceptual schema for a bibliographic retrieval system. The model is based upon an analysis of data elements in the USMARC Formats for Bibliographic Data. The conceptual schema describes a database comprising 2 separate files of bibliographic descriptions, one of works and the other of items. Each file consists of individual descriptive surrogates of their respective entities. the specific data content of each file is defined by a data dictionary. Data elements used in the description of bibliographic works reflect the nature of works as intellectual and linguistic objects. The descriptive elements of bibliographic items describe the physical properties of bibliographic entities. Bibliographic relationships constitute the logical strucutre of the database
  3. Oehlschläger, S.: Aus der 48. Sitzung der Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Verbundsysteme am 12. und 13. November 2004 in Göttingen (2005) 0.01
    0.0108186975 = product of:
      0.02884986 = sum of:
        0.011462449 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3556) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.011462449 = score(doc=3556,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.09700725 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032069415 = queryNorm
            0.11816074 = fieldWeight in 3556, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=3556)
        0.0043934314 = product of:
          0.008786863 = sum of:
            0.008786863 = weight(_text_:system in 3556) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.008786863 = score(doc=3556,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.10100432 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.032069415 = queryNorm
                0.08699492 = fieldWeight in 3556, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=3556)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
        0.01299398 = product of:
          0.02598796 = sum of:
            0.02598796 = weight(_text_:etc in 3556) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.02598796 = score(doc=3556,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17370372 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.4164915 = idf(docFreq=533, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.032069415 = queryNorm
                0.14961085 = fieldWeight in 3556, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  5.4164915 = idf(docFreq=533, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=3556)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.375 = coord(3/8)
    
    Content
    Die Deutsche Bibliothek Retrieval von Content In dem Projekt wird angestrebt, Verfahren zu entwickeln und einzuführen, die automatisch und ohne intellektuelle Bearbeitung für das Content-Retrieval ausreichend Sucheinstiege bieten. Dabei kann es sich um die Suche nach Inhalten von Volltexten, digitalen Abbildern, Audiofiles, Videofiles etc. von in Der Deutschen Bibliothek archivierten digitalen Ressourcen oder digitalen Surrogaten archivierter analoger Ressourcen (z. B. OCR-Ergebnisse) handeln. Inhalte, die in elektronischer Form vorhanden sind, aber dem InternetBenutzer Der Deutschen Bibliothek bisher nicht oder nur eingeschränkt zur Verfügung stehen, sollen in möglichst großem Umfang und mit möglichst großem Komfort nutzbar gemacht werden. Darüber hinaus sollen Inhalte benutzt werden, die für ein in ILTIS katalogisiertes Objekt beschreibenden Charakter haben, um auf das beschriebene Objekt zu verweisen. Die höchste Priorität liegt dabei auf der Erschließung von Inhalten in Textformaten. In einem ersten Schritt wurde der Volltext aller Zeitschriften, die im Projekt "Exilpresse digital" digitalisiert wurden, für eine erweiterte Suche genutzt. In einem nächsten Schritt soll die PSI-Software für die Volltextindexierung von Abstracts evaluiert werden. MILOS Mit dem Einsatz von MILOS eröffnet sich die Möglichkeit, nicht oder wenig sachlich erschlossene Bestände automatisch mit ergänzenden Inhaltserschließungsinformationen zu versehen, der Schwerpunkt liegt dabei auf der Freitext-Indexierung. Das bereits in einigen Bibliotheken eingesetzte System, das inzwischen von Der Deutschen Bibliothek für Deutschland lizenziert wurde, wurde in eine UNIX-Version überführt und angepasst. Inzwischen wurde nahezu der gesamte Bestand rückwirkend behandelt, die Daten werden im Gesamt-OPAC für die Recherche zur Verfügung stehen. Die in einer XMLStruktur abgelegten Indexeinträge werden dabei vollständig indexiert und zugänglich gemacht. Ein weiterer Entwicklungsschritt wird in dem Einsatz von MILOS im Online-Verfahren liegen.
  4. Provansal, A.: Neuf mois après (1997) 0.01
    0.006911755 = product of:
      0.05529404 = sum of:
        0.05529404 = sum of:
          0.024603218 = weight(_text_:system in 917) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.024603218 = score(doc=917,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.10100432 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
                0.032069415 = queryNorm
              0.2435858 = fieldWeight in 917, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=917)
          0.030690823 = weight(_text_:29 in 917) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.030690823 = score(doc=917,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.11281017 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
                0.032069415 = queryNorm
              0.27205724 = fieldWeight in 917, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=917)
      0.125 = coord(1/8)
    
    Abstract
    Electronic documents are creating new services and generating new demands, with consequent impacts on the means of transmitting knowledge, international standards and democratisation of access. Universal bibliographic control depends on common rules for bibliographic description and format to ensure compatibility and exchange. In addition to ISBN and UNIMARC for cataloguing, Z39.50 allows searching of heterogeneous databases and SGML makes cataloguing in publication a reality. Such developments must be based on knowledge of what users want and their real search and consultation practices, not what the system devisers have the technology to create
    Date
    29. 1.1996 16:50:24
  5. Riva, P.: Mapping MARC 21 linking entry fields to FRBR and Tillett's taxonomy of bibliographic relationships (2004) 0.01
    0.005894781 = product of:
      0.023579124 = sum of:
        0.010544236 = product of:
          0.021088472 = sum of:
            0.021088472 = weight(_text_:system in 136) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.021088472 = score(doc=136,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.10100432 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.032069415 = queryNorm
                0.20878783 = fieldWeight in 136, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=136)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
        0.013034889 = product of:
          0.026069777 = sum of:
            0.026069777 = weight(_text_:22 in 136) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.026069777 = score(doc=136,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.112301625 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.032069415 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 136, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=136)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(2/8)
    
    Abstract
    Bibliographic relationships have taken on even greater importance in the context of ongoing efforts to integrate concepts from the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) into cataloging codes and database structures. In MARC 21, the linking entry fields are a major mechanism for expressing relationships between bibliographic records. Taxonomies of bibliographic relationships have been proposed by Tillett, with an extension by Smiraglia, and in FRBR itself. The present exercise is to provide a detailed bidirectional mapping of the MARC 21 linking fields to these two schemes. The correspondence of the Tillett taxonomic divisions to the MARC categorization of the linking fields as chronological, horizontal, or vertical is examined as well. Application of the findings to MARC format development and system functionality is discussed.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  6. Wiesenmüller, H.: Von Fröschen und Strategen : Ein kleiner Leitfaden zur AACR2-Debatte (2002) 0.00
    0.003898194 = product of:
      0.031185552 = sum of:
        0.031185552 = product of:
          0.062371105 = sum of:
            0.062371105 = weight(_text_:etc in 636) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.062371105 = score(doc=636,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17370372 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.4164915 = idf(docFreq=533, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.032069415 = queryNorm
                0.35906604 = fieldWeight in 636, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  5.4164915 = idf(docFreq=533, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=636)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.125 = coord(1/8)
    
    Abstract
    Zu den bestbesuchten Veranstaltungen des diesjährigen Bibliothekartages in Augsburg gehörte die Diskussion um die Reform der Formalerschließung. Ganz offensichtlich spielt die Katalogisierung - trotz Internet, Digitalisierung, Dublin Core etc. - im täglichen Geschäft nach wie vor eine bedeutende Rolle. Die Debatte um Regelwerke und Datenformate wird jedenfalls mit großem Ernst und Engagement geführt. Doch die Diskussion droht mittlerweile unübersichtlich zu werden, fachliche Argumente, technische Erfordernisse und bibliothekspolitische Positionen gehen munter durcheinander.
  7. Weber, R.: "Functional requirements for bibliographic records" und Regelwerksentwicklung (2001) 0.00
    0.0038018425 = product of:
      0.03041474 = sum of:
        0.03041474 = product of:
          0.06082948 = sum of:
            0.06082948 = weight(_text_:22 in 6838) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.06082948 = score(doc=6838,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.112301625 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.032069415 = queryNorm
                0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 6838, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6838)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.125 = coord(1/8)
    
    Source
    Dialog mit Bibliotheken. 13(2001) H.3, S.20-22
  8. Giordano, R.: ¬The documentation of electronic texts : using Text Encoding Initiative headers: an introduction (1994) 0.00
    0.0034387347 = product of:
      0.027509877 = sum of:
        0.027509877 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 866) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027509877 = score(doc=866,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.09700725 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032069415 = queryNorm
            0.2835858 = fieldWeight in 866, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=866)
      0.125 = coord(1/8)
    
    Abstract
    Presents a general introduction to the form and functions of the Text Encoding Initiative (TEI) headers and explains their relationship to the MARC record. The TEI header's main strength is that it documents electronic texts in a standard exchange format that should be understandable to both librarian cataloguers and text encoders outside of librarianship. TEI gives encoders the ability to document the the electronic text itself, its source, its encoding principles, and revisions, as well as non bibliographic characteristics of the text that can support both scholarly analysis and retrieval. Its bibliographic descriptions can be loaded into standard remote bibliographic databases, which should make electronic texts as easy to find for researchers as texts in other media. Presents a brief overview of the TEI header, the file description and ways in which the TEI headers have counterparts in MARC, the Encoding Description, the Profile Description, the Revision Description, the size and complexity of the TEI header, and the use of the TEI header to support document retrieval and analysis, with notes on some of the prospects and problems
  9. McBride, J.L.: Faceted subject access for music through USMARC : a case for linked fields (2000) 0.00
    0.0034387347 = product of:
      0.027509877 = sum of:
        0.027509877 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5403) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027509877 = score(doc=5403,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.09700725 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032069415 = queryNorm
            0.2835858 = fieldWeight in 5403, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5403)
      0.125 = coord(1/8)
    
    Abstract
    The USMARC Format for Bibliographic Description contains three fields (045, 047, and 048) designed to facilitate subject access to music materials. The fields cover three of the main aspects of subject description for music: date of composition, form or genre, and number of instruments or voices, respectively. The codes are rarely used for subject access, because of the difficulty of coding them and because false drops would result in retrieval of bibliographic records where more than one musical work is present, a situation that occurs frequently with sound recordings. It is proposed that the values of the fields be converted to natural language and that subfield 8 be used to link all access fields in a bibliographic record for greater precision in retrieval. This proposal has implications beyond music cataloging, especially for metadata and any bibliographic records describing materials containing many works and subjects.
  10. Oehlschläger, S.: Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Verbundsysteme : Aus der 46. Sitzung am 21. und 22. April 2004 im Bibliotheksservice-Zentrum Baden-Württemberg in Konstanz (2004) 0.00
    0.0034386222 = product of:
      0.013754489 = sum of:
        0.0061508045 = product of:
          0.012301609 = sum of:
            0.012301609 = weight(_text_:system in 2434) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.012301609 = score(doc=2434,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.10100432 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.032069415 = queryNorm
                0.1217929 = fieldWeight in 2434, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2434)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
        0.007603685 = product of:
          0.01520737 = sum of:
            0.01520737 = weight(_text_:22 in 2434) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.01520737 = score(doc=2434,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.112301625 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.032069415 = queryNorm
                0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 2434, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=2434)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.25 = coord(2/8)
    
    Content
    "Die verbundübergreifende Fernleihe für Monografien steht kurz vor ihrer flächendeckenden Einführung. Voraussetzung hierfür ist ein funktionierendes Online-Fernleih-System in jedem Verbund. Dies ist prototypisch realisiert. Die Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Verbundsysteme geht davon aus, dass ab dem 1. Januar 2005 der Echtbetrieb aufgenommen werden kann und die Leistungen nach der neuen Leihverkehrsordnung abgerechnet werden können. Zur Klärung von Detailfragen trifft sich im Juni die Arbeitsgruppe Verbundübergreifende Fernleihe. Bereits in der letzten Sitzung wurde festgelegt, dass die jeweiligen Bibliotheken über die Festlegung des Leitwegs entscheiden sollen, und die Verbundzentralen nur dann eingreifen werden, wenn Probleme entstehen sollten. Die individuelle Leitwegsteuerung, sowohl innerhalb des Verbundes als auch bei der Festlegung der Reihenfolge der anzugehenden Verbünde hat in einigen Verbünden hohe Priorität. Traditionell gewachsene Beziehungen müssen von den Bestellsystemen abgebildet werden können. Eine lokale Zusammenarbeit wird auch über Verbundgrenzen hinaus möglich sein. Im Hinblick auf die Verrechnung verbundübergreifender Fernleihen haben sich die Verbünde auf einen einheitlichen Verrechnungszeitraum geeinigt. Voraussetzung ist außerdem, dass die Unterhaltsträger die notwendigen Rahmenbedingungen für die Abrechnung schaffen und die neue Leihverkehrsordnung in allen Bundesländern rechtzeitig in Kraft gesetzt wird."
  11. Deifel, R.: Offener Brief der Sektion 6 des Deutschen Bibliotheksverbandes (2002) 0.00
    0.0032883026 = product of:
      0.02630642 = sum of:
        0.02630642 = product of:
          0.05261284 = sum of:
            0.05261284 = weight(_text_:29 in 995) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.05261284 = score(doc=995,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.11281017 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.032069415 = queryNorm
                0.46638384 = fieldWeight in 995, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=995)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.125 = coord(1/8)
    
    Date
    29. 9.2002 18:43:44
  12. IFLA Cataloguing Principles : steps towards an International Cataloguing Code, 3. Report from the 3rd IFLA Meeting of Experts on an International Cataloguing Code : Cairo, Egypt, 2005 (2006) 0.00
    0.0031002415 = product of:
      0.024801932 = sum of:
        0.024801932 = product of:
          0.049603865 = sum of:
            0.049603865 = weight(_text_:29 in 2313) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.049603865 = score(doc=2313,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.11281017 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.032069415 = queryNorm
                0.43971092 = fieldWeight in 2313, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2313)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.125 = coord(1/8)
    
    Date
    30. 7.2004 14:20:29
    Series
    IFLA series on bibliographic control; vol. 29
  13. Tennant, R.: ¬A bibliographic metadata infrastructure for the twenty-first century (2004) 0.00
    0.0030723528 = product of:
      0.024578823 = sum of:
        0.024578823 = product of:
          0.049157646 = sum of:
            0.049157646 = weight(_text_:22 in 2845) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.049157646 = score(doc=2845,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.112301625 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.032069415 = queryNorm
                0.4377287 = fieldWeight in 2845, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2845)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.125 = coord(1/8)
    
    Date
    9.12.2005 19:22:38
    Source
    Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2, S.175-181
  14. Heaney, M.: Object-oriented cataloging (1995) 0.00
    0.0028368114 = product of:
      0.02269449 = sum of:
        0.02269449 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02269449 = score(doc=3339,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09700725 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032069415 = queryNorm
            0.23394634 = fieldWeight in 3339, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3339)
      0.125 = coord(1/8)
    
    Abstract
    Catalogues have evolved from lists of physical items present in particular libraries into computerized access and retrieval tools for works dispersed across local and national boundaries. Works themselves are no longer constrained by physical form yet cataloguing rules have not evolved in parallel with these developments. Reanalyzes the nature of works and their publication in an approach based on object oriented modelling and demonstrates the advantages to be gained thereby. Suggests a strategic plan to enable an organic transformation to be made from current MARC based cataloguing to object oriented cataloguing. Proposes major revisions of MARC in order to allow records to maximize the benefits of both computerized databases and high speed data networks. This will involve a fundamental shift away from the AACR philosophy of description of, plus access to, physical items
  15. Boruah, B.B.; Ravikumar, S.; Gayang, F.L.: Consistency, extent, and validation of the utilization of the MARC 21 bibliographic standard in the college libraries of Assam in India (2023) 0.00
    0.0028368114 = product of:
      0.02269449 = sum of:
        0.02269449 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1183) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02269449 = score(doc=1183,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09700725 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032069415 = queryNorm
            0.23394634 = fieldWeight in 1183, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1183)
      0.125 = coord(1/8)
    
    Abstract
    This paper brings light to the existing practice of cataloging in the college libraries of Assam in terms of utilizing the MARC 21 standard and its structure, i.e., the tags, subfield codes, and indicators. Catalog records from six college libraries are collected and a survey is conducted to understand the local users' information requirements for the catalog. Places, where libraries have scope to improve and which divisions of tags could be more helpful for them in information retrieval, are identified and suggested. This study fulfilled the need for local-level assessment of the catalogs.
  16. Hoffmann, L.: ¬Die Globalisierung macht vor der Katalogisierung nicht Halt : Mit AACR2 zum Global Player? (2003) 0.00
    0.0027156018 = product of:
      0.021724815 = sum of:
        0.021724815 = product of:
          0.04344963 = sum of:
            0.04344963 = weight(_text_:22 in 1544) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.04344963 = score(doc=1544,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.112301625 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.032069415 = queryNorm
                0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 1544, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1544)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.125 = coord(1/8)
    
    Date
    22. 3.2016 12:15:46
  17. Schaffner, V.: FRBR in MAB2 und Primo - ein kafkaesker Prozess? : Möglichkeiten der FRBRisierung von MAB2-Datensätzen in Primo exemplarisch dargestellt an Datensätzen zu Franz Kafkas "Der Process" (2011) 0.00
    0.002598796 = product of:
      0.020790368 = sum of:
        0.020790368 = product of:
          0.041580737 = sum of:
            0.041580737 = weight(_text_:etc in 907) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.041580737 = score(doc=907,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17370372 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.4164915 = idf(docFreq=533, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.032069415 = queryNorm
                0.23937736 = fieldWeight in 907, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  5.4164915 = idf(docFreq=533, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=907)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.125 = coord(1/8)
    
    Abstract
    FRBR (Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records) ist ein logisches Denkmodell für bibliographische Datensätze, welches zur benutzerfreundlicheren Gestaltung von Browsing in Online-Bibliothekskatalogen herangezogen werden kann. Im Österreichischen Bibliothekenverbund (OBV) werden bibliographische Datensätze nach den Regeln für die alphabetische Katalogisierung in wissenschaftlichen Bibliotheken (RAK-WB) erstellt und liegen im Datenformat MAB2 (Maschinelles Austauschformat für Bibliotheken) vor. Mit der Software Primo von Ex Libris, die 2009 implementiert wurde, besteht die Möglichkeit bibliographische Datensätze für die Anzeige neu aufzubereiten. Wie ausgehend von MAB2-Daten eine möglichst FRBR-konforme Datenpräsentation in Primo geleistet werden kann und welche Probleme sich dabei ergeben, ist die zentrale Fragestellung dieser Master Thesis. Exemplarisch dargestellt wird dies anhand von Datensätzen des Österreichischen Bibliothekenverbundes zu Franz Kafkas "Der Process". Im Fokus stehen drei Aspekte, welche im Zusammenhang mit FRBR, MAB2 und Primo als besonders problematisch und diskussionswürdig erscheinen: das Konzept des "Werkes", Expressionen als praxistaugliche Entitäten und Aggregate bzw. mehrbändig begrenzte Werke. Nach einer Einführung in das FRBR-Modell wird versucht einen idealen FRBRBaum zu Kafkas "Der Process" in seinen unterschiedlichen Ausprägungen (Übersetzungen, Verfilmungen, Textvarianten, Aggregate etc.) darzustellen: Schon hier werden erste Grenzen des Modells sichtbar. Daran anschließend werden Datensätze des OBV einer Analyse unterzogen, um die FRBRTauglichkeit von MAB2 und die Möglichkeit der FRBR keys in Primo zu beleuchten. Folgende Einschränkungen wurden deutlich: Die derzeitige Herangehensweise und Praxis der Formalerschließung ist nicht auf FRBR vorbereitet. Die vorliegenden Metadaten sind zu inkonsistent, um ein maschinelles Extrahieren für eine FRBR-konforme Datenpräsentation zu ermöglichen. Die Möglichkeiten des Werkclusterings und der Facettierung in Primo bieten darüber hinaus zwar einen Mehrwert für das Browsing in Trefferlisten, jedoch nur bedingt im FRBR-Sinne.
  18. Chapman, L.: How to catalogue : a practical manual using AACR2 and Library of Congress (1990) 0.00
    0.0024853002 = product of:
      0.019882401 = sum of:
        0.019882401 = product of:
          0.039764803 = sum of:
            0.039764803 = weight(_text_:system in 6081) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.039764803 = score(doc=6081,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.10100432 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.032069415 = queryNorm
                0.3936941 = fieldWeight in 6081, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6081)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.125 = coord(1/8)
    
    LCSH
    MARC System / United States
    Subject
    MARC System / United States
  19. Fattahi, R.: ¬A uniform approach to the indexing of cataloguing data in online library systems (1997) 0.00
    0.0024315526 = product of:
      0.019452421 = sum of:
        0.019452421 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 131) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.019452421 = score(doc=131,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09700725 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.032069415 = queryNorm
            0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 131, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=131)
      0.125 = coord(1/8)
    
    Abstract
    Argues that in library cataloguing and for optional functionality of bibliographic records the indexing of fields and subfields should follow a uniform approach. This would maintain effectiveness in searching, retrieval and display of bibliographic information both within systems and between systems. However, a review of different postings to the AUTOCAT and USMARC discussion lists indicates that the indexing and tagging of cataloguing data do not, at present, follow a consistent approach in online library systems. If the rationale of cataloguing principles is to bring uniformity in bibliographic description and effectiveness in access, they should also address the question of uniform approaches to the indexing of cataloguing data. In this context and in terms of the identification and handling of data elements, cataloguing standards (codes, MARC formats and the Z39.50 standard) should be brought closer, in that they should provide guidelines for the designation of data elements for machine readable records
  20. Kushwoh, S.S.; Gautam, J.N.; Singh, R.: Migration from CDS / ISIS to KOHA : a case study of data conversion from CCF to MARC 21 (2009) 0.00
    0.002282894 = product of:
      0.018263152 = sum of:
        0.018263152 = product of:
          0.036526304 = sum of:
            0.036526304 = weight(_text_:system in 2279) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.036526304 = score(doc=2279,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.10100432 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.032069415 = queryNorm
                0.36163113 = fieldWeight in 2279, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2279)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.125 = coord(1/8)
    
    Abstract
    Standards are important for quality and interoperability in any system. Bibliographic record creation standards such as MARC 21 (Machine Readable Catalogue), CCF (Common Communication Format), UNIMARC (Universal MARC) and their local variations, are in practice all across the library community. ILMS (Integrated Library Management Systems) are using these standards for the design of databases and the creation of bibliographic records. Their use is important for uniformity of the system and bibliographic data, but there are problems when a library wants to switch over from one system to another using different standards. This paper discusses migration from one record standard to another, mapping of data and related issues. Data exported from CDS/ISIS CCF based records to KOHA MARC 21 based records are discussed as a case study. This methodology, with few modifications, can be applied for migration of data in other bibliographicformats too. Freeware tools can be utilized for migration.

Years

Languages

  • e 21
  • d 18
  • f 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 38
  • m 6
  • s 5
  • b 1
  • el 1
  • x 1
  • More… Less…