Search (2 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Bowman, J.H."
  • × theme_ss:"Katalogfragen allgemein"
  1. Bowman, J.H.: ¬The catalog as barrier to retrieval : Part 1: hyphens and ampersands in titles (2000) 0.06
    0.057755806 = product of:
      0.11551161 = sum of:
        0.11551161 = sum of:
          0.06602007 = weight(_text_:systems in 5365) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.06602007 = score(doc=5365,freq=6.0), product of:
              0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052184064 = queryNorm
              0.41167158 = fieldWeight in 5365, product of:
                2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                  6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5365)
          0.049491543 = weight(_text_:22 in 5365) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.049491543 = score(doc=5365,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.1827397 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.052184064 = queryNorm
              0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5365, product of:
                1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                  2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5365)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    An Internet survey of 38 different OPAC systems, at eighty different libraries, was undertaken to investigate the effect on retrieval of the presence of the hyphen or the ampersand in titles. Title and Keyword searches were performed. In Title search, 22 of the systems treat the hyphen as equivalent to a space, while in Keyword the number is 16. The other systems treat it in various different ways (even including the equivalent of NOT), which means that results of searching multiple catalogs are very inconsistent. The ampersand may be ignored, treated as a special character, or treated as "and," again with very inconsistent results. Various recommendations are made with a view to improving consistency of performance.
  2. Bowman, J.H.: ¬The catalog as barrier to retrieval : Part 2: forms of name (2000) 0.01
    0.013476291 = product of:
      0.026952581 = sum of:
        0.026952581 = product of:
          0.053905163 = sum of:
            0.053905163 = weight(_text_:systems in 5400) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.053905163 = score(doc=5400,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.052184064 = queryNorm
                0.33612844 = fieldWeight in 5400, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5400)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    
    Abstract
    Continues the results of the Internet survey of 38 different OPAC systems, this looking at forms of name and cross-references. Tests were conducted to examine results of searching for a personal name, Leonardo da Vinci, and a corporate entered subordinately, under parts of the name which were not the leading element. Many libraries provide no cross-references, and in many cases the presence absence of punctuation in the search string has a significant effect. The effect variation when combined in an Author/Title search is also considered. The also considers the special filing of names beginning Mc, which is almost confined to some British systems, and the interfiling of subject with author entries personal names. A number of recommendations conclude the article.