Search (14 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × year_i:[2010 TO 2020}
  • × theme_ss:"OPAC"
  1. Naun, C.C.: Next generation OPACs : a cataloging viewpoint (2010) 0.01 
    0.010890487 = product of:
  0.021780973 = sum of:
    0.021780973 = product of:
      0.043561947 = sum of:
        0.043561947 = weight(_text_:systems in 2987) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043561947 = score(doc=2987,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052184064 = queryNorm
            0.2716328 = fieldWeight in 2987, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2987)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Since around 2005 several striking attempts have been made to rethink the design of library catalogs in production systems; the North Carolina State University's (NCSU) Endeca catalog being a notable example. These developments are taking place just as the continued relevance of traditional cataloging is being questioned. This article examines the relationship of these new designs to evolving cataloging practice and the changing discovery environment.
  2. Beck, C.: Primo gegen Google Scholar : benutzerfreundliches Discovery 10 Jahre später (2018) 0.01 
    0.010890487 = product of:
  0.021780973 = sum of:
    0.021780973 = product of:
      0.043561947 = sum of:
        0.043561947 = weight(_text_:systems in 5196) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043561947 = score(doc=5196,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052184064 = queryNorm
            0.2716328 = fieldWeight in 5196, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5196)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Wissenschaftliche Bibliotheken stehen seit zehn Jahren vor der Frage, ob sie für die Vermittlung ihrer Bestände Discovery-Systeme oder Internet-Suchmaschinen wie Google Scholar einsetzen sollen. Ein Vergleich des Discovery-Systems Primo des Anbieters Ex Libris mit Google Scholar zeigt, dass Primo eine bessere Usability bietet, indem es summa summarum einfacher zu bedienen ist sowie relevantere und vielfältigere Treffer liefert.
  3. Rodríguez Bravo, B.; Travieso Rodríguez, C.; Simões, M.G. de M.; Freitas, M.C.V. de: Evaluating discovery tools in Portuguese and Spanish academic libraries (2014) 0.01 
    0.010605331 = product of:
  0.021210661 = sum of:
    0.021210661 = product of:
      0.042421322 = sum of:
        0.042421322 = weight(_text_:22 in 1467) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042421322 = score(doc=1467,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1827397 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052184064 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1467, 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=1467)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik
  4. Jäger-Dengler-Harles, I.: Informationsvisualisierung und Retrieval im Fokus der Infromationspraxis (2013) 0.01 
    0.010605331 = product of:
  0.021210661 = sum of:
    0.021210661 = product of:
      0.042421322 = sum of:
        0.042421322 = weight(_text_:22 in 1709) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042421322 = score(doc=1709,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1827397 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052184064 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1709, 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=1709)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    4. 2.2015 9:22:39
  5. Alonso Lifante, M.P.; Molero Madrid, F.J.: Enhancing OPAC records : evaluating and fitting within cataloguing standards a new proposal of description parameters for historical astronomical resources (2015) 0.01 
    0.010605331 = product of:
  0.021210661 = sum of:
    0.021210661 = product of:
      0.042421322 = sum of:
        0.042421322 = weight(_text_:22 in 2611) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.042421322 = score(doc=2611,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1827397 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052184064 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2611, 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=2611)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  6. Rieh, S.Y.; Kim, Y.-M.; Markey, K.: Amount of invested mental effort (AIME) in online searching (2012) 0.01 
    0.009625921 = product of:
  0.019251842 = sum of:
    0.019251842 = product of:
      0.038503684 = sum of:
        0.038503684 = weight(_text_:systems in 2726) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038503684 = score(doc=2726,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052184064 = queryNorm
            0.24009174 = fieldWeight in 2726, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2726)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    This research investigates how people's perceptions of information retrieval (IR) systems, their perceptions of search tasks, and their perceptions of self-efficacy influence the amount of invested mental effort (AIME) they put into using two different IR systems: a Web search engine and a library system. It also explores the impact of mental effort on an end user's search experience. To assess AIME in online searching, two experiments were conducted using these methods: Experiment 1 relied on self-reports and Experiment 2 employed the dual-task technique. In both experiments, data were collected through search transaction logs, a pre-search background questionnaire, a post-search questionnaire and an interview. Important findings are these: (1) subjects invested greater mental effort searching a library system than searching the Web; (2) subjects put little effort into Web searching because of their high sense of self-efficacy in their searching ability and their perception of the easiness of the Web; (3) subjects did not recognize that putting mental effort into searching was something needed to improve the search results; and (4) data collected from multiple sources proved to be effective for assessing mental effort in online searching.
  7. Kneissl, J.; Wiesenmüller, H.: Resource Discovery Systeme im Zusammenspiel mit anderen Rechercheinstrumenten : Herausforderung für Wissenschaftler/innen und Bibliotheken (2019) 0.01 
    0.009529176 = product of:
  0.019058352 = sum of:
    0.019058352 = product of:
      0.038116705 = sum of:
        0.038116705 = weight(_text_:systems in 5407) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038116705 = score(doc=5407,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052184064 = queryNorm
            0.23767869 = fieldWeight in 5407, 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=5407)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    In einer 2018 an der Evangelischen Hochschule Nürnberg durchgeführten Studie wurde das Zusammenspiel unterschiedlicher Rechercheinstrumente nach der Einführung eines Resource Discovery Systems ("OPACplus") untersucht. Eine Online-Nutzerbefragung ergab einerseits - trotz verschiedener Probleme - eine große Zufriedenheit sowohl mit dem OPAC als auch mit dem OPACplus, zeigte aber auch, dass das Nebeneinander Schwierigkeiten macht und der OPACplus noch intensiver genutzt werden könnte. Ein Fokusgruppengespräch mit den Mitarbeitenden zeigte u.a., dass der OPACplus besser beworben werden muss. Es werden einige Vorschläge für Verbesserungen der Nutzeroberfläche des OPACplus und eine Marketingstrategie gemacht. Jedoch kann das Resource Discovery System derzeit weder die Fachdatenbanken noch den OPAC vollständig ersetzen.
  8. Lee, Y.Y.; Yang, S.Q.: Folksonomies as subject access : a survey of tagging in library online catalogs and discovery layers (2012) 0.01 
    0.008167865 = product of:
  0.01633573 = sum of:
    0.01633573 = product of:
      0.03267146 = sum of:
        0.03267146 = weight(_text_:systems in 309) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03267146 = score(doc=309,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052184064 = queryNorm
            0.2037246 = fieldWeight in 309, 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=309)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    This paper describes a survey on how system vendors and libraries handled tagging in OPACs and discovery layers. Tags are user added subject metadata, also called folksonomies. This survey also investigated user behavior when they face the possibility to tag. The findings indicate that legacy/classic systems have no tagging capability. About 47% of the discovery tools provide tagging function. About 49% of the libraries that have a system with tagging capability have turned the tagging function on in their OPACs and discovery tools. Only 40% of the libraries that turned tagging on actually utilized user added subject metadata as access point to collections. Academic library users are less active in tagging than public library users.
  9. Gnoli, C.; Pusterla, L.; Bendiscioli, A.; Recinella, C.: Classification for collections mapping and query expansion (2016) 0.01 
    0.008167865 = product of:
  0.01633573 = sum of:
    0.01633573 = product of:
      0.03267146 = sum of:
        0.03267146 = weight(_text_:systems in 3102) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03267146 = score(doc=3102,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052184064 = queryNorm
            0.2037246 = fieldWeight in 3102, 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=3102)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Source
    Proceedings of the 15th European Networked Knowledge Organization Systems Workshop (NKOS 2016) co-located with the 20th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Digital Libraries 2016 (TPDL 2016), Hannover, Germany, September 9, 2016. Edi. by Philipp Mayr et al. [http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1676/=urn:nbn:de:0074-1676-5]
  10. Lennard, H.; Surkau, M.: Benutzerevaluation und Usability-Test zur neuen Suchoberfläche Primo (Ex Libris) (2011) 0.01 
    0.0068065543 = product of:
  0.013613109 = sum of:
    0.013613109 = product of:
      0.027226217 = sum of:
        0.027226217 = weight(_text_:systems in 4033) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027226217 = score(doc=4033,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052184064 = queryNorm
            0.1697705 = fieldWeight in 4033, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4033)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Zum Wintersemester 2010/11 wurde von der Universitätsbibliothek der Freien Universität Berlin das neue Bibliotheksportal Primo eingeführt, das auf der gleichnamigen Software der Firma Ex Libris basiert. Zunächst in einem "soft launch" als Betaversion live geschaltet, soll es in naher Zukunft den derzeitigen Katalog und die Digitale Bibliothek als Suchoberflächen ersetzen. Diese Situation bot einen optimalen Ausgangspunkt für eine Studie zur Usability des neuen Portals, da deren Ergebnisse direkt in die Neugestaltung der Relaunch-Version einfließen können. Um verschiedene Arten von Usability-Problemen des Bibliotheksportal Primo zu identifizieren, haben sich die Autorinnen einer Methodenkombination bedient. Zum einen wurde eine Heuristische Evaluation und zum anderen 20 Usability-Tests der deutschsprachigen Oberfläche des Portals durchgeführt. Die detaillierte Darstellung der so festgestellten Usability-Probleme bildet den Kern der Arbeit. Als Basis für das Verständnis des Systems und der methodischen Vorgehensweise, wird außerdem Primo im Kontext der "Neuen Kataloge" und deren Funktionalitäten näher beleuchtet, sowie die theoretischen Grundlagen der in der Arbeit verwendeten Methoden der Usability-Evaluation dargestellt.
  11. Casson, E.; Fabbrizzi, A.; Slavic, A.: Subject search in Italian OPACs : an opportunity in waiting? (2011) 0.01 
    0.0068065543 = product of:
  0.013613109 = sum of:
    0.013613109 = product of:
      0.027226217 = sum of:
        0.027226217 = weight(_text_:systems in 1801) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027226217 = score(doc=1801,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052184064 = queryNorm
            0.1697705 = fieldWeight in 1801, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1801)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Subject access to bibliographic data supported by knowledge organization systems, such as subject headings and classification, plays an important role in ensuring the quality of library catalogues. It is generally acknowledged that users have a strong affinity to subject browsing and searching and are inclined tofollow meaningful links between resources. Research studies, however, show that library OPACs are not designed to support or make good use of subject indexes and their underlying semantic structure. A project entitled OPAC semantici was initiated in 2003 by a number of Italian subject specialists and the Italian "Research Group on Subject Indexing" (GRIS) with a goal to analyse and evaluate subject access in Italian library catalogues through a survey of 150 OPACs. Applying the same methodology, a follow-up survey to assess whether any improvement had taken place was conducted five years later, in spring 2008. Analysis of these two surveys indicated that there was a slight improvement. The authors discuss the results of these two surveys, analyse the problems in subject searching in OPACs and explain the recommendations for subject searching enhancement put forward by GRIS. Using the example of Italian OPACs, the authors will attempt to outline some requirements for a subject searching interface and explain how this can be achieved through authority control.
  12. Catalogue 2.0 : the future of the library catalogue (2013) 0.01 
    0.0054452433 = product of:
  0.010890487 = sum of:
    0.010890487 = product of:
      0.021780973 = sum of:
        0.021780973 = weight(_text_:systems in 1339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021780973 = score(doc=1339,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052184064 = queryNorm
            0.1358164 = fieldWeight in 1339, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1339)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Will there be a library catalogue in the future and, if so, what will it look like? In the last 25 years, the library catalogue has undergone an evolution, from card catalogues to OPACs, discovery systems and even linked data applications making library bibliographic data accessible on the web. At the same time, users expectations of what catalogues will be able to offer in the way of discovery have never been higher. This groundbreaking edited collection brings together some of the foremost international cataloguing practitioners and thought leaders, including Lorcan Dempsey, Emmanuelle Bermès, Marshall Breeding and Karen Calhoun, to provide an overview of the current state of the art of the library catalogue and look ahead to see what the library catalogue might become. Practical projects and cutting edge concepts are showcased in discussions of linked data and the Semantic Web, user expectations and needs, bibliographic control, the FRBRization of the catalogue, innovations in search and retrieval, next-generation discovery products and mobile catalogues.
  13. Subject access : preparing for the future. Conference on August 20 - 21, 2009 in Florence, the IFLA Classification and Indexing Section sponsored an IFLA satellite conference entitled "Looking at the Past and Preparing for the Future" (2011) 0.01 
    0.0054452433 = product of:
  0.010890487 = sum of:
    0.010890487 = product of:
      0.021780973 = sum of:
        0.021780973 = weight(_text_:systems in 1799) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021780973 = score(doc=1799,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16037072 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052184064 = queryNorm
            0.1358164 = fieldWeight in 1799, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1799)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Content
    Inhalt: Introduction -- Focusing on user needs :new ways of subject access in Czechia -- Subject analysis and indexing :an "Italian version" of the analytico-synthetic model -- Subject search in Italian OPACs :an opportunity in waiting? -- Semiautomatic merging of two universal thesauri :the case of Estonia -- 20 years SWD :German subject authority data prepared for the future -- Mixed translations of the DDC :design, usability, and implications for knowledge organization in multilingual environments -- Animals belonging to the emperor :enabling viewpoint warrant in classification -- Dewey in Sweden :leaving SAB after 87 years -- Enhancing information services using machine-to-machine terminology services -- Social bookmarking and subject indexing -- Social indexing at the Stockholm Public Library -- The Nuovo Soggettario Thesaurus :structural features and web application projects -- Jzyk Hasel Przedmiotowych Biblioteki Narodowej (National Library of Poland Subject Headings) :from card catalogs to Digital Library :some questions about the future of a Local Subject Heading Systems in the changing world of information retrieval -- FAST headings as tags for WorldCat
  14. Waschatz, B.: Schmökern ist schwierig : Viele Uni-Bibliotheken ordnen ihre Bücher nicht - Tipps für eine erfolgreiche Suche (2010) 0.01 
    0.0053026653 = product of:
  0.010605331 = sum of:
    0.010605331 = product of:
      0.021210661 = sum of:
        0.021210661 = weight(_text_:22 in 3206) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021210661 = score(doc=3206,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1827397 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052184064 = queryNorm
            0.116070345 = fieldWeight in 3206, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=3206)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Date
    3. 5.1997 8:44:22

Authors

Languages

Types

Themes

Subjects

Classifications