-
Bryant, P.: Making the most of our libraries (1997)
0.05
0.048032045 = product of:
0.14409614 = sum of:
0.016276294 = weight(_text_:in in 2439) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016276294 = score(doc=2439,freq=14.0), product of:
0.058476754 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.27833787 = fieldWeight in 2439, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2439)
0.12781984 = weight(_text_:education in 2439) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.12781984 = score(doc=2439,freq=6.0), product of:
0.2025344 = queryWeight, product of:
4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.63110185 = fieldWeight in 2439, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2439)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Abstract
- Reports results of the 2 studies: "Retrospective conversion of library catalogues in institutions of higher education in the United Kingdom: a study of the justification for a national programme" and "Retrospective conversion for libraries in the UK other than those funded by the Higher Education Funding Councils". The latter study was on behalf of libraries other than national ones: public; learned and scientific society; professional; and religious. Covers: the scale of UK retrospective conversion issues, opportunities and need for a national strategy; retrospective conversion in an international context; conversion of library catalogues in UK higher education institutions; and catalogues in other UK libraries
- Footnote
- Rez. in: Managing information 5(1998) no.4, S.46 (J. Bowman)
-
Report on the future of bibliographic control : draft for public comment (2007)
0.04
0.043675594 = product of:
0.08735119 = sum of:
0.010546046 = weight(_text_:in in 1271) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.010546046 = score(doc=1271,freq=32.0), product of:
0.058476754 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.18034597 = fieldWeight in 1271, product of:
5.656854 = tf(freq=32.0), with freq of:
32.0 = termFreq=32.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1271)
0.031627204 = weight(_text_:education in 1271) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.031627204 = score(doc=1271,freq=2.0), product of:
0.2025344 = queryWeight, product of:
4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.1561572 = fieldWeight in 1271, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1271)
0.045177933 = weight(_text_:great in 1271) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.045177933 = score(doc=1271,freq=2.0), product of:
0.24206476 = queryWeight, product of:
5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.18663573 = fieldWeight in 1271, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1271)
0.5 = coord(3/6)
- Abstract
- The future of bibliographic control will be collaborative, decentralized, international in scope, and Web-based. Its realization will occur in cooperation with the private sector, and with the active collaboration of library users. Data will be gathered from multiple sources; change will happen quickly; and bibliographic control will be dynamic, not static. The underlying technology that makes this future possible and necessary-the World Wide Web-is now almost two decades old. Libraries must continue the transition to this future without delay in order to retain their relevance as information providers. The Working Group on the Future of Bibliographic Control encourages the library community to take a thoughtful and coordinated approach to effecting significant changes in bibliographic control. Such an approach will call for leadership that is neither unitary nor centralized. Nor will the responsibility to provide such leadership fall solely to the Library of Congress (LC). That said, the Working Group recognizes that LC plays a unique role in the library community of the United States, and the directions that LC takes have great impact on all libraries. We also recognize that there are many other institutions and organizations that have the expertise and the capacity to play significant roles in the bibliographic future. Wherever possible, those institutions must step forward and take responsibility for assisting with navigating the transition and for playing appropriate ongoing roles after that transition is complete. To achieve the goals set out in this document, we must look beyond individual libraries to a system wide deployment of resources. We must realize efficiencies in order to be able to reallocate resources from certain lower-value components of the bibliographic control ecosystem into other higher-value components of that same ecosystem. The recommendations in this report are directed at a number of parties, indicated either by their common initialism (e.g., "LC" for Library of Congress, "PCC" for Program for Cooperative Cataloging) or by their general category (e.g., "Publishers," "National Libraries"). When the recommendation is addressed to "All," it is intended for the library community as a whole and its close collaborators.
The Library of Congress must begin by prioritizing the recommendations that are directed in whole or in part at LC. Some define tasks that can be achieved immediately and with moderate effort; others will require analysis and planning that will have to be coordinated broadly and carefully. The Working Group has consciously not associated time frames with any of its recommendations. The recommendations fall into five general areas: 1. Increase the efficiency of bibliographic production for all libraries through increased cooperation and increased sharing of bibliographic records, and by maximizing the use of data produced throughout the entire "supply chain" for information resources. 2. Transfer effort into higher-value activity. In particular, expand the possibilities for knowledge creation by "exposing" rare and unique materials held by libraries that are currently hidden from view and, thus, underused. 3. Position our technology for the future by recognizing that the World Wide Web is both our technology platform and the appropriate platform for the delivery of our standards. Recognize that people are not the only users of the data we produce in the name of bibliographic control, but so too are machine applications that interact with those data in a variety of ways. 4. Position our community for the future by facilitating the incorporation of evaluative and other user-supplied information into our resource descriptions. Work to realize the potential of the FRBR framework for revealing and capitalizing on the various relationships that exist among information resources. 5. Strengthen the library profession through education and the development of metrics that will inform decision-making now and in the future. The Working Group intends what follows to serve as a broad blueprint for the Library of Congress and its colleagues in the library and information technology communities for extending and promoting access to information resources.
-
Frâncu, V.: ¬An interpretation of the FRBR model (2004)
0.04
0.04024852 = product of:
0.08049704 = sum of:
0.008610812 = weight(_text_:in in 2647) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.008610812 = score(doc=2647,freq=12.0), product of:
0.058476754 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.14725187 = fieldWeight in 2647, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2647)
0.060237244 = weight(_text_:great in 2647) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.060237244 = score(doc=2647,freq=2.0), product of:
0.24206476 = queryWeight, product of:
5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.24884763 = fieldWeight in 2647, 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=2647)
0.011648986 = product of:
0.023297971 = sum of:
0.023297971 = weight(_text_:22 in 2647) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023297971 = score(doc=2647,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15054214 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2647, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2647)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(3/6)
- Abstract
- Despite the existence of a logical structural model for bibliographic records which integrates any record type, library catalogues persist in offering catalogue records at the level of 'items'. Such records however, do not clearly indicate which works they contain. Hence the search possibilities of the end user are unduly limited. The Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) present through a conceptual model, independent of any cataloguing code or implementation, a globalized view of the bibliographic universe. This model, a synthesis of the existing cataloguing rules, consists of clearly structured entities and well defined types of relationships among them. From a theoretical viewpoint, the model is likely to be a good knowledge organiser with great potential in identifying the author and the work represented by an item or publication and is able to link different works of the author with different editions, translations or adaptations of those works aiming at better answering the user needs. This paper is presenting an interpretation of the FRBR model opposing it to a traditional bibliographic record of a complex library material.
- Content
- 1. Introduction With the diversification of the material available in library collections such as: music, film, 3D objects, cartographic material and electronic resources like CD-ROMS and Web sites, the existing cataloguing principles and codes are no longer adequate to enable the user to find, identify, select and obtain a particular entity. The problem is not only that material fails to be appropriately represented in the catalogue records but also access to such material, or parts of it, is difficult if possible at all. Consequently, the need emerged to develop new rules and build up a new conceptual model able to cope with all the requirements demanded by the existing library material. The Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records developed by an IFLA Study Group from 1992 through 1997 present a generalised view of the bibliographic universe and are intended to be independent of any cataloguing code or implementation (Tillett, 2002). Outstanding scholars like Antonio Panizzi, Charles A. Cutter and Seymour Lubetzky formulated the basic cataloguing principles of which some can be retrieved, as Denton (2003) argues as updated versions, between the basic lines of the FRBR model: - the relation work-author groups all the works of an author - all the editions, translations, adaptations of a work are clearly separated (as expressions and manifestations) - all the expressions and manifestations of a work are collocated with their related works in bibliographic families - any document (manifestation and item) can be found if the author, title or subject of that document is known - the author is authorised by the authority control - the title is an intrinsic part of the work + authority control entity
- Date
- 17. 6.2015 14:40:22
- Series
- Advances in knowledge organization; vol.9
-
Riesthuis, G.J.A.; Zumer, M.: FRBR and FRANAR : subject access (2004)
0.02
0.024463493 = product of:
0.07339048 = sum of:
0.013153232 = weight(_text_:in in 2646) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.013153232 = score(doc=2646,freq=28.0), product of:
0.058476754 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.22493094 = fieldWeight in 2646, product of:
5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
28.0 = termFreq=28.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2646)
0.060237244 = weight(_text_:great in 2646) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.060237244 = score(doc=2646,freq=2.0), product of:
0.24206476 = queryWeight, product of:
5.6307793 = idf(docFreq=430, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.24884763 = fieldWeight in 2646, 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=2646)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Abstract
- In the last decade a discussion has been going an in the Division of Bibliographic Control of the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA) about the principles of cataloguing. This discussion was initiated by the widespread replacement of the card and list catalogues by Online Public Access Catalogues (OPACs) since 1980. In this paper we discuss the role of subject cataloguing in three important documents that are the results of this discussion. Our conclusion is that the interest in subject cataloguing has grown remarkably, but is still not an the level it deserves given the fact that a great part of all searches in OPACs are subject oriented.
- Content
- 1. Introduction In this paper we address two questions: 1. What is the position of subject indexing in the thinking of the library world after the publication of the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (1998)? 2. Is this position in accordance with the requirements of the users searching for documents about a given subject? Research Shows that searching an a topic (i.e. subject access) is an important, even predominant type of end-user searching of library catalogues and even more so of other bibliographic databases. Between one third and two thirds of all OPAC searches are probably subject searches (Large & Beheshti, 199%). Taking into account different ways in which searching an a topic is implemented in library catalogues (subject headings, classification, keywords only) the percentage may be even higher. For example title word searching may be a substitute for subject searching if no better tools are available. In the light of this it is not surprising that the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) (1998) pays attention to subject searching, as well as the Functional Requirements and Numbering of Authority Records (FRANAR) (2003). Also the Statement of International Cataloguing Principles: Final draft of 19 December 2003, which is the result of the first First IFLA Meeting of Experts an an International Cataloguing Code mentiong subject access as a function of cataloguing (Statement, 2003). In this paper we discuss the ways these three documents deal with subjects.
- Series
- Advances in knowledge organization; vol.9
-
Smiraglia, R.P.: Rethinking what we catalog : documents as cultural artifacts (2008)
0.02
0.020107657 = product of:
0.060322966 = sum of:
0.0076109543 = weight(_text_:in in 789) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0076109543 = score(doc=789,freq=6.0), product of:
0.058476754 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.1301535 = fieldWeight in 789, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=789)
0.052712012 = weight(_text_:education in 789) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.052712012 = score(doc=789,freq=2.0), product of:
0.2025344 = queryWeight, product of:
4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.260262 = fieldWeight in 789, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=789)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Abstract
- Cataloging is at its most interesting when it is comprehended as part of a larger, meaningful, objective. Resource description is a complex task; but the essence of librarianship is curatorship of a collection, and that sense of curatorial responsibility is one of the things that makes resource description into cataloging-that is, professional responsibility is the difference between the task of transcription and the satisfaction of professional decisions well-made. Part of the essential difference is comprehension of the cultural milieu from which specific resources arise, and the modes of scholarship that might be used to nudge them to reveal their secrets for the advancement of knowledge. In this paper I describe a course designed to lend excitement and professional judgment to the education of future catalogers and collection managers by conveying the notion that all documents are, in fact, cultural artifacts. Part of a knowledge-sensitive curriculum for knowledge organization, the purpose of this course is to go beyond the concept of documents as mere packets of information to demonstrate that each is a product of its time and circumstances. Bibliographic skill leads to greater comfort with the intellectual and cultural forces that impel the creation of documents. Students become comfortable with the curatorial side of cataloging - the placement of each document in its cultural milieu as the goal of resource description, rather than the act of description itself.
-
Berberich, S.; Weimar, A.: Kunde und Katalog : Qualitätsmanagement für Katalogdienstleistungen (2005)
0.02
0.016926806 = product of:
0.05078042 = sum of:
0.008610812 = weight(_text_:in in 3871) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.008610812 = score(doc=3871,freq=12.0), product of:
0.058476754 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.14725187 = fieldWeight in 3871, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3871)
0.04216961 = weight(_text_:education in 3871) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04216961 = score(doc=3871,freq=2.0), product of:
0.2025344 = queryWeight, product of:
4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.2082096 = fieldWeight in 3871, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3871)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Abstract
- Benutzerumfragen belegen immer wieder eindrucksvoll, dass Online-Kataloge zu den Dienstleistungen einer Bibliothek gehören, die mit höchster Priorität genutzt werden. Das Qualitätsmanagement für Kataloge setzt sich seit längerem schon intensiv mit Regelwerksfragen auseinander. Diese werden sich frühestens mittel- bis langfristig als Verbesserungen für Bibliothekskunden auswirken. Kurz- bis mittelfristig müssen Bibliotheken jedoch sicherstellen, dass zentrale Dienstleistungen unter Aspekten der Kundenorientierung qualitätsoptimiert werden können: Die Qualität einer mit höchster Priorität nachgefragten Dienstleistung ist ein entscheidender Erfolgsfaktor für eine Bibliothek, und die Orientierung des Qualitätsmanagements auf den Kunden ist hierbei die Weichenstellung für Wettbewerbsfähigkeit und Erfolg. Die Frage stellt sich also, wie und zu welchen Kosten Kataloge im allgemeinen und die Inhaltserschließung im besonderen in ihrer Qualität optimiert werden können?
- Content
- Auf S.1108 findet sich folgende Fehler-Statistik: "So misslangen 17,4% aller Anfragen, weil nicht RSWK/SWD-gerechtes Suchvokabular verwendet wurde. Drei Viertel davon konnten zu gleichen Teilen auf - nicht in der SWD vorhandene Komposita (wie "Industriedenkmalstiftung", "Menschenrechtsdidaktik") - fremdsprachige Begriffe (wie "education nazie", "US youth") und - Pluralverwendung (wie "neuronale Netze", "Bildungssysteme USA"), sowie weitere 13,5% auf - Postkoordination (wie "Hildesheimer Dom", "Preußischer Landtag") zurückgeführt werden. Bei nahezu 25% der Recherchen scheiterten die Kunden bereits an der Bedienung des OPAC. Einerseits schränkten sie ihre Suchen durch Belegung zu vieler Felder respektive Eingabe zu vieler Begriffe in ein Suchfeld zu sehr ein (10,6%). Andererseits gaben sie richtiges Vokabular in das falsche Feld ein und beachteten Normierungen bei einzelnen Kriterien - wie beispielsweise bei der Autorensuche - nicht (falsche Eingabe 12,1 %). Weitere Ursachen, wie Tippfehler oder tatsächlich nicht vorhandener Bestand, summierten sich auf eher marginale 5,0%."
Auf S.1110 wird folgende Schlussfolgerung angeboten: "Folgerichtig liegt ein wichtiger Schritt in der Optimierung des OPAC an die Kundenbedürfnisse in der Implementierung einer einfachen, intuitiv bedienbaren Standardsuchoberfläche. Diese bietet idealerweise nur ein einziges Eingabefeld für Freitext, das die wichtigsten Suchkriterien wie Autor, Titel und verbale Sacherschließung abdeckt. Boolesche Verknüpfungen sollten, sofern vorhanden, voreingestellt und vom Kunden nicht veränderbar sein." Die bislang üblichen dreigliedrigen Oberflächen können als erweiterte Suchen unverändert erhalten bleiben. Damit lassen sich Nulltreffer, die auf die Belegung zu vieler oder falscher Felder sowie falsche Feldkombinationen zurückzuführen sind, minimieren."
-
Treichler, W.: Katalogisierungsregeln, Kataloge und Benützer in schweizerischen Bibliotheken (1986)
0.02
0.015164334 = product of:
0.045493003 = sum of:
0.010546046 = weight(_text_:in in 5352) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.010546046 = score(doc=5352,freq=2.0), product of:
0.058476754 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.18034597 = fieldWeight in 5352, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=5352)
0.034946956 = product of:
0.06989391 = sum of:
0.06989391 = weight(_text_:22 in 5352) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06989391 = score(doc=5352,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15054214 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 5352, 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=5352)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Date
- 8.10.2000 14:22:27
-
Lubetzky, S.: Writings on the classical art of cataloging (2001)
0.02
0.015164334 = product of:
0.045493003 = sum of:
0.010546046 = weight(_text_:in in 2622) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.010546046 = score(doc=2622,freq=2.0), product of:
0.058476754 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.18034597 = fieldWeight in 2622, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=2622)
0.034946956 = product of:
0.06989391 = sum of:
0.06989391 = weight(_text_:22 in 2622) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06989391 = score(doc=2622,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15054214 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 2622, 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=2622)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Footnote
- Rez. in: Technicalities 22(2002) no.1, S.19-20 (S.S. Intner)
-
Aliprand, J.M.: ¬The Unicode Standard : its scope, design prin. ciples, and prospects for international cataloging (2000)
0.01
0.014781458 = product of:
0.044344373 = sum of:
0.015221909 = weight(_text_:in in 4608) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015221909 = score(doc=4608,freq=6.0), product of:
0.058476754 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.260307 = fieldWeight in 4608, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4608)
0.029122464 = product of:
0.05824493 = sum of:
0.05824493 = weight(_text_:22 in 4608) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05824493 = score(doc=4608,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15054214 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 4608, 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=4608)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Date
- 10. 9.2000 17:38:22
- Footnote
- Beitrag in einem Themenheft "What in the World...Cataloging on an International Scale": papers from the ALCTS preconference, June 26, 1998 "What in the World...Cataloging on an International Scale". ALCTS Preconference, Washington, D.C.
-
Jochum, U.: ¬Eine Theorie der Verweisung (1998)
0.01
0.0126369465 = product of:
0.037910838 = sum of:
0.008788372 = weight(_text_:in in 2268) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.008788372 = score(doc=2268,freq=2.0), product of:
0.058476754 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.15028831 = fieldWeight in 2268, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2268)
0.029122464 = product of:
0.05824493 = sum of:
0.05824493 = weight(_text_:22 in 2268) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05824493 = score(doc=2268,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15054214 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 2268, 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=2268)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Abstract
- Verweisungen gelten gemeinhin als bloße 'Auffindungshilfen' für Eintragungen in Katalogen. Dabei wird jedoch leicht übersehen, daß sie ein wesentliches katalogtechnisches Strukturmerkmal bilden. Die hier vorgelegte Theorie will die semantische Struktur von Verweisungen und dadurch die semantische Struktur von Katalogen klären
- Source
- Bibliothek: Forschung und Praxis. 22(1998) H.2, S.235-243
-
Olson, H.A.: Thinking professionals : teaching critical cataloguing (1997)
0.01
0.01229947 = product of:
0.073796816 = sum of:
0.073796816 = weight(_text_:education in 664) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.073796816 = score(doc=664,freq=2.0), product of:
0.2025344 = queryWeight, product of:
4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.3643668 = fieldWeight in 664, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.7112455 = idf(docFreq=1080, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=664)
0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
- Abstract
- Cataloguing education has been the focus of definition and ebate for over a century. Moving beyond cataloguing theory and the creation of records, to the management and process of producing catalogues, increases the complexity of demands placed on professionals and educators. Graduates need to understand their catalogues and integrated systems holistically. This requires a knowledge of each element, of standards governing the creation and maintenance of records, and of the relationship between the record and the catalogue and/or its constituent network. Moreover, the professional must know these things critically, and beyond mere acceptance of standards, so that the catalogue can effectively perform its mediating function between the collection and users
-
Miksa, S.D.: ¬The challenges of change : a review of cataloging and classification literature, 2003-2004 (2007)
0.01
0.011825167 = product of:
0.0354755 = sum of:
0.012177527 = weight(_text_:in in 266) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012177527 = score(doc=266,freq=6.0), product of:
0.058476754 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.2082456 = fieldWeight in 266, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=266)
0.023297971 = product of:
0.046595942 = sum of:
0.046595942 = weight(_text_:22 in 266) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.046595942 = score(doc=266,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15054214 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 266, 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=266)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Abstract
- This paper reviews the enormous changes in cataloging and classification reflected in the literature of 2003 and 2004, and discusses major themes and issues. Traditional cataloging and classification tools have been re-vamped and new resources have emerged. Most notable themes are: the continuing influence of the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Control (FRBR); the struggle to understand the ever-broadening concept of an "information entity"; steady developments in metadata-encoding standards; and the globalization of information systems, including multilinguistic challenges.
- Date
- 10. 9.2000 17:38:22
-
LeBlanc, J.; Kurth, M.: ¬An operational model for library metadata maintenance (2008)
0.01
0.011752427 = product of:
0.03525728 = sum of:
0.010546046 = weight(_text_:in in 101) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.010546046 = score(doc=101,freq=8.0), product of:
0.058476754 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.18034597 = fieldWeight in 101, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=101)
0.024711233 = product of:
0.049422465 = sum of:
0.049422465 = weight(_text_:22 in 101) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049422465 = score(doc=101,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15054214 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.32829654 = fieldWeight in 101, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=101)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Abstract
- Libraries pay considerable attention to the creation, preservation, and transformation of descriptive metadata in both MARC and non-MARC formats. Little evidence suggests that they devote as much time, energy, and financial resources to the ongoing maintenance of non-MARC metadata, especially with regard to updating and editing existing descriptive content, as they do to maintenance of such information in the MARC-based online public access catalog. In this paper, the authors introduce a model, derived loosely from J. A. Zachman's framework for information systems architecture, with which libraries can identify and inventory components of catalog or metadata maintenance and plan interdepartmental, even interinstitutional, workflows. The model draws on the notion that the expertise and skills that have long been the hallmark for the maintenance of libraries' catalog data can and should be parlayed towards metadata maintenance in a broader set of information delivery systems.
- Date
- 10. 9.2000 17:38:22
19. 6.2010 19:22:28
-
Bowman, J.H.: ¬The catalog as barrier to retrieval : Part 1: hyphens and ampersands in titles (2000)
0.01
0.011380568 = product of:
0.034141704 = sum of:
0.01375598 = weight(_text_:in in 5365) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01375598 = score(doc=5365,freq=10.0), product of:
0.058476754 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.23523843 = fieldWeight in 5365, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5365)
0.020385725 = product of:
0.04077145 = sum of:
0.04077145 = weight(_text_:22 in 5365) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04077145 = score(doc=5365,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15054214 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = 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)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- 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.
-
Visintin, G.: Passaggi (1998)
0.01
0.011080294 = product of:
0.03324088 = sum of:
0.009942909 = weight(_text_:in in 3053) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.009942909 = score(doc=3053,freq=4.0), product of:
0.058476754 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.17003182 = fieldWeight in 3053, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3053)
0.023297971 = product of:
0.046595942 = sum of:
0.046595942 = weight(_text_:22 in 3053) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.046595942 = score(doc=3053,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15054214 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3053, 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=3053)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Abstract
- Examines in detail the author cataloguing practices adopted by the Italian National Library Service, as set out in its 1995 Cataloguing Guide (Guida SBN), and discusses how far these practices accord with the standard 1979 RICA author cataloguing rules. Since the author headings prescribed by RICA include personal names, corporate names and titles, this survey looks at all such SBN catalogue entries having an access point function. Presents many examples of standard and variant forms of heading, and reviews control procedures
- Date
- 22. 2.1999 20:40:57
-
Hillmann, D.I.: "Parallel universes" or meaningful relationships : envisioning a future for the OPAC and the net (1996)
0.01
0.011080294 = product of:
0.03324088 = sum of:
0.009942909 = weight(_text_:in in 5581) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.009942909 = score(doc=5581,freq=4.0), product of:
0.058476754 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.17003182 = fieldWeight in 5581, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5581)
0.023297971 = product of:
0.046595942 = sum of:
0.046595942 = weight(_text_:22 in 5581) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.046595942 = score(doc=5581,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15054214 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 5581, 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=5581)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Abstract
- Over the past year, innumerable discussions on the relationship between traditional library OPACs and the newly burgeoning World WideWeb have occured in many libraries and in virtually every library related discussion list. Rumors and speculation abound, some insisting that SGML will replace USMARC "soon," others maintaining that OPACs that haven't migrated to the Web will go the way of the dinosaurs.
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 22(1996) nos.3/4, S.97-103
-
El-Sherbini, M.A.: Cataloging and classification : review of the literature 2005-06 (2008)
0.01
0.011080294 = product of:
0.03324088 = sum of:
0.009942909 = weight(_text_:in in 249) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.009942909 = score(doc=249,freq=4.0), product of:
0.058476754 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.17003182 = fieldWeight in 249, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=249)
0.023297971 = product of:
0.046595942 = sum of:
0.046595942 = weight(_text_:22 in 249) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.046595942 = score(doc=249,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15054214 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = 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)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Abstract
- This paper reviews library literature on cataloging and classification published in 2005-06. It covers pertinent literature in the following areas: the future of cataloging; Functional Requirement for Bibliographic Records (FRBR); metadata and its applications and relation to Machine-Readable Cataloging (MARC); cataloging tools and standards; authority control; and recruitment, training, and the changing role of catalogers.
- Date
- 10. 9.2000 17:38:22
-
Solis, A.Q.; Navarrete, O.A.: Medidas de calidad en la creacion de catalogos de bibliotecas (1998)
0.01
0.010896482 = product of:
0.032689445 = sum of:
0.012303721 = weight(_text_:in in 2825) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012303721 = score(doc=2825,freq=8.0), product of:
0.058476754 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.21040362 = fieldWeight in 2825, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2825)
0.020385725 = product of:
0.04077145 = sum of:
0.04077145 = weight(_text_:22 in 2825) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04077145 = score(doc=2825,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15054214 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2825, 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=2825)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Abstract
- A discussion of the importance of clear cataloguing policies and routines as the basis of quality control, in relation to the methods used in the College of Mexico Library. The fundamental principle is to prevent errors occuring rather than to correct them subsequently. Indices of quality and effiency in relation to errors which do and do not affect retrieval, established through monthly review of samples of the work of each cataloguer, are used to monitor activities and ensure high standards. This process, essentially collaborative, promotes an overall culture of quality
- Date
- 30. 1.1999 19:22:45
- Footnote
- Übers. des Titels: Measures of quality in the creation of library catalogues
-
Randall, N.B.: Spelling errors in the database : shadow or substance? (1999)
0.01
0.010347021 = product of:
0.031041062 = sum of:
0.010655336 = weight(_text_:in in 106) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.010655336 = score(doc=106,freq=6.0), product of:
0.058476754 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.1822149 = fieldWeight in 106, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=106)
0.020385725 = product of:
0.04077145 = sum of:
0.04077145 = weight(_text_:22 in 106) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04077145 = score(doc=106,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15054214 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 106, 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=106)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- Abstract
- Describes the results of research to determine the extent of spelling errors in the State University of New York at Albany's online catalogue, whether these errors seriously affect users' access to library materials and what effect spelling errors will have on the group database planned for the State University of New York (SUNY). Using standard database tests, the catalogues of the four SUNY University Centers (Albany, Binghamton, Buffalo and Stony Brook) were studied. In addition, two comparison catalogues were studied: the New York State Library's Excelsior and California University's Melvyl. Results show that misspellings are unavoidable due to the way that most catalogues were built. These errors, however, are rarely an impediment to retrieval. Concludes with suggested ways to find and correct misspellings without expensive large scale efforts
- Date
- 10. 9.2000 17:38:22
-
Byrum, J.D.: ¬The emerging global bibliographical network : the era of international standardization in the development of cataloging policy (2000)
0.01
0.0101349 = product of:
0.030404698 = sum of:
0.015843466 = weight(_text_:in in 190) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015843466 = score(doc=190,freq=26.0), product of:
0.058476754 = queryWeight, product of:
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = queryNorm
0.27093613 = fieldWeight in 190, product of:
5.0990195 = tf(freq=26.0), with freq of:
26.0 = termFreq=26.0
1.3602545 = idf(docFreq=30841, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=190)
0.014561232 = product of:
0.029122464 = sum of:
0.029122464 = weight(_text_:22 in 190) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.029122464 = score(doc=190,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15054214 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.042989567 = 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)
0.33333334 = coord(2/6)
- 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
- Footnote
- Beitrag in einem Themenheft "What in the World...Cataloging on an International Scale": papers from the ALCTS preconference, June 26, 1998 "What in the World...Cataloging on an International Scale". ALCTS Preconference, Washington, D.C.
