-
Coyle, K.: Future considerations : the functional library systems record (2004)
0.07
0.06600664 = product of:
0.13201328 = sum of:
0.13201328 = sum of:
0.07545151 = weight(_text_:systems in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07545151 = score(doc=562,freq=6.0), product of:
0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = queryNorm
0.4704818 = fieldWeight in 562, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=562)
0.056561764 = weight(_text_:22 in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056561764 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1827397 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = 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)
- 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.
- Source
- Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2, S.166-174
-
UNIMARC and CDS/ISIS : Proceedings of the Workshops held in Budapest, 21.-22. June 1993 and Barcelona, 26. August 1993 (1994)
0.04
0.043804124 = product of:
0.08760825 = sum of:
0.08760825 = sum of:
0.038116705 = weight(_text_:systems in 8779) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.038116705 = score(doc=8779,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = queryNorm
0.23767869 = fieldWeight in 8779, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=8779)
0.049491543 = weight(_text_:22 in 8779) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049491543 = score(doc=8779,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1827397 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 8779, 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=8779)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Content
- Enthält die Beiträge: CAMPOS, F.: UNIMARC: state of the art on the universal format for international exchange; HOLT, B.: The maintenance of UNIMARC; WILLER, M.: UNIMARC / Authorities format; HOPKINSON, A.: CDS/ISIS as a tool for implementing UNIMARC; BERKE, S. u. M. SIPOS: The comprehensive information system of the National Széchényi Library and the Hungarian MARC format; SHRAIBERG, Y.: Application of the CDS/ISIS software package and UNIMARC format in the automated systems of the Russian National Public Library for Science and Technology and other libraries of the Russian Federation; STOKLASOVA, B.: Exchange formats in the Czech Republic: past, present and future
-
Snow, M.: Visual depictions and the use of MARC : a view from the trenches of slide librarianship (1989)
0.04
0.043804124 = product of:
0.08760825 = sum of:
0.08760825 = sum of:
0.038116705 = weight(_text_:systems in 2862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.038116705 = score(doc=2862,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = queryNorm
0.23767869 = fieldWeight in 2862, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2862)
0.049491543 = weight(_text_:22 in 2862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049491543 = score(doc=2862,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1827397 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2862, 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=2862)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Paper presented at a symposium on 'Implementing the Art and Architecture Thesaurus (AAT): Controlled Vocabulary in the Extended MARC format', held at the 1989 Annual Conference of the Art Libraries Society of North America. The only way to get bibliographic records on to campus on-line library catalogues, and slide records on the national bibliographic utilities, is through the use of MARC. Discusses the importance of having individual slide and photograph records on the national bibliographic utilities, and considers the obstacles which currently make this difficult. Discusses mapping to MARC from data base management systems.
- Date
- 4.12.1995 22:51:36
-
Carvalho, J.R. de; Cordeiro, M.I.; Lopes, A.; Vieira, M.: Meta-information about MARC : an XML framework for validation, explanation and help systems (2004)
0.04
0.043804124 = product of:
0.08760825 = sum of:
0.08760825 = sum of:
0.038116705 = weight(_text_:systems in 2848) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.038116705 = score(doc=2848,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = queryNorm
0.23767869 = fieldWeight in 2848, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2848)
0.049491543 = weight(_text_:22 in 2848) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049491543 = score(doc=2848,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1827397 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2848, 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=2848)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2, S.131-137
-
Yee, R.; Beaubien, R.: ¬A preliminary crosswalk from METS to IMS content packaging (2004)
0.04
0.03754639 = product of:
0.07509278 = sum of:
0.07509278 = sum of:
0.03267146 = weight(_text_:systems in 4752) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03267146 = score(doc=4752,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = queryNorm
0.2037246 = fieldWeight in 4752, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4752)
0.042421322 = weight(_text_:22 in 4752) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042421322 = score(doc=4752,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1827397 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4752, 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=4752)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- As educational technology becomes pervasive, demand will grow for library content to be incorporated into courseware. Among the barriers impeding interoperability between libraries and educational tools is the difference in specifications commonly used for the exchange of digital objects and metadata. Among libraries, Metadata Encoding and Transmission Standard (METS) is a new but increasingly popular standard; the IMS content-package (IMS-CP) plays a parallel role in educational technology. This article describes how METS-encoded library content can be converted into digital objects for IMS-compliant systems through an XSLT-based crosswalk. The conceptual models behind METS and IMS-CP are compared, the design and limitations of an XSLT-based translation are described, and the crosswalks are related to other techniques to enhance interoperability.
- Source
- Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1, S.69-81
-
MARC and metadata : METS, MODS, and MARCXML: current and future implications (2004)
0.03
0.028280882 = product of:
0.056561764 = sum of:
0.056561764 = product of:
0.11312353 = sum of:
0.11312353 = weight(_text_:22 in 2840) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11312353 = score(doc=2840,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1827397 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = queryNorm
0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 2840, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=2840)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1
-
MARC and metadata : METS, MODS, and MARCXML: current and future implications (2004)
0.02
0.024745772 = product of:
0.049491543 = sum of:
0.049491543 = product of:
0.09898309 = sum of:
0.09898309 = weight(_text_:22 in 7196) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09898309 = score(doc=7196,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1827397 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 7196, 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=7196)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1
-
MARC and metadata : METS, MODS, and MARCXML: current and future implications part 2 (2004)
0.02
0.024745772 = product of:
0.049491543 = sum of:
0.049491543 = product of:
0.09898309 = sum of:
0.09898309 = weight(_text_:22 in 2841) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09898309 = score(doc=2841,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1827397 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 2841, 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=2841)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2
-
Byrne, D.J.: MARC manual : understanding and using MARC records (1998)
0.02
0.021210661 = product of:
0.042421322 = sum of:
0.042421322 = product of:
0.084842645 = sum of:
0.084842645 = weight(_text_:22 in 6077) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.084842645 = score(doc=6077,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1827397 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = queryNorm
0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 6077, 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=6077)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 2. 8.2001 16:22:33
-
Caplan, P.; Guenther, R.: Metadata for Internet resources : the Dublin Core Metadata Elements Set and its mapping to USMARC (1996)
0.02
0.019997604 = product of:
0.03999521 = sum of:
0.03999521 = product of:
0.07999042 = sum of:
0.07999042 = weight(_text_:22 in 2408) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07999042 = score(doc=2408,freq=4.0), product of:
0.1827397 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = queryNorm
0.4377287 = fieldWeight in 2408, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2408)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 13. 1.2007 18:31:22
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 22(1996) nos.3/4, S.43-58
-
Tennant, R.: ¬A bibliographic metadata infrastructure for the twenty-first century (2004)
0.02
0.019997604 = product of:
0.03999521 = sum of:
0.03999521 = product of:
0.07999042 = sum of:
0.07999042 = weight(_text_:22 in 2845) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07999042 = score(doc=2845,freq=4.0), product of:
0.1827397 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = 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)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 9.12.2005 19:22:38
- Source
- Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2, S.175-181
-
Murphy, C.: Curriculum-enhanced MARC (CEMARC) : a new cataloging format for school librarians (1995)
0.02
0.017497903 = product of:
0.034995805 = sum of:
0.034995805 = product of:
0.06999161 = sum of:
0.06999161 = weight(_text_:22 in 5100) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06999161 = score(doc=5100,freq=4.0), product of:
0.1827397 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = queryNorm
0.38301262 = fieldWeight in 5100, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5100)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 11. 9.1996 19:22:20
- Source
- Literacy: traditional, cultural, technological. Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Conference of the International Association of School Librarianship (selected papers), Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, Pittsburgh University, School of Library and Information Science, 17-22 Jul 94
-
USMARC format for classification data : including guidelines for content designation (1991)
0.02
0.016505018 = product of:
0.033010036 = sum of:
0.033010036 = product of:
0.06602007 = sum of:
0.06602007 = weight(_text_:systems in 4372) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06602007 = score(doc=4372,freq=6.0), product of:
0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = queryNorm
0.41167158 = fieldWeight in 4372, 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=4372)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Format specifications for the communication of MARC classification records, which may be used in online public catalog retrieval systems, in systems to maintain and develop classification schedules, and in online systems for library classifiers. Defines the codes and conventions (tags, indicators, subfield codes, and codes values) that identify the data elements in the records. Developed to support the 2 major US classification schemes: Library of Congress Classification and Dewey Decimal Classification, but also lets you communicate other classification schemes. Includes a glossary of classification terms and full record examples of LCC, DDC, NLM classification and UDC
-
Format integration and its effect on cataloging, training, and systems (1993)
0.02
0.01633573 = product of:
0.03267146 = sum of:
0.03267146 = product of:
0.06534292 = sum of:
0.06534292 = weight(_text_:systems in 67) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06534292 = score(doc=67,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = queryNorm
0.4074492 = fieldWeight in 67, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=67)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
-
Fattahi, R.: ¬A uniform approach to the indexing of cataloguing data in online library systems (1997)
0.02
0.01633573 = product of:
0.03267146 = sum of:
0.03267146 = product of:
0.06534292 = sum of:
0.06534292 = weight(_text_:systems in 131) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06534292 = score(doc=131,freq=8.0), product of:
0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = queryNorm
0.4074492 = fieldWeight in 131, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=131)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- 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
-
Chachra, V.: Globalization and the Unicode standard (2001)
0.02
0.01633573 = product of:
0.03267146 = sum of:
0.03267146 = product of:
0.06534292 = sum of:
0.06534292 = weight(_text_:systems in 3945) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06534292 = score(doc=3945,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = queryNorm
0.4074492 = fieldWeight in 3945, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=3945)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Archive, libraries and museums convergence: 24th Library Systems Seminar Paris, 12.-14. April 2000. Ed.by M. Witt and M. Ihadjadene
-
Bales, K.: ¬The USMARC formats and visual materials (1989)
0.01
0.014140441 = product of:
0.028280882 = sum of:
0.028280882 = product of:
0.056561764 = sum of:
0.056561764 = weight(_text_:22 in 2861) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056561764 = score(doc=2861,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1827397 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2861, 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=2861)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 4.12.1995 22:40:20
-
Gopinath, M.A.: Standardization for resource sharing databases (1995)
0.01
0.014140441 = product of:
0.028280882 = sum of:
0.028280882 = product of:
0.056561764 = sum of:
0.056561764 = weight(_text_:22 in 4414) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056561764 = score(doc=4414,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1827397 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 4414, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4414)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- It is helpful and essential to adopt standards for bibliographic information, project description and institutional information which are shareable for access to information resources within a country. Describes a strategy for adopting international standards of bibliographic information exchange for developing a resource sharing facilitation database in India. A list of 22 ISO standards for information processing is included
-
Proffitt, M.: Pulling it all together : use of METS in RLG cultural materials service (2004)
0.01
0.014140441 = product of:
0.028280882 = sum of:
0.028280882 = product of:
0.056561764 = sum of:
0.056561764 = weight(_text_:22 in 767) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056561764 = score(doc=767,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1827397 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 767, 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=767)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1, S.65-68
-
Bourne, R.: MARC harmonization : progress and problems (1997)
0.01
0.014140441 = product of:
0.028280882 = sum of:
0.028280882 = product of:
0.056561764 = sum of:
0.056561764 = weight(_text_:22 in 873) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056561764 = score(doc=873,freq=2.0), product of:
0.1827397 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.052184064 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 873, 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=873)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- LASER link. 1997, Spring/Summer, S.22-24
