Search (6 results, page 1 of 1)

0.051913112 = product of:
  0.25956556 = sum of:
    0.25956556 = sum of:
      0.23151202 = weight(_text_:german in 192) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.23151202 = score(doc=192,freq=18.0), product of:
          0.24051933 = queryWeight, product of:
            5.808009 = idf(docFreq=360, maxDocs=44218)
            0.041411664 = queryNorm
          0.9625506 = fieldWeight in 192, product of:
            4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
              18.0 = termFreq=18.0
            5.808009 = idf(docFreq=360, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=192)
      0.028053544 = weight(_text_:22 in 192) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.028053544 = score(doc=192,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1450166 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.041411664 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 192, 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=192)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

German academic libraries acquire a large number of books from British and American publishers. The bibliographic records of the Library of Congress and the British National Bibliography are offered in most German library networks. Thus, projects REUSE and REUSE+ were undertaken when there was a demand for harmonization of Germany cataloging rules with AACR2 (Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules). Experts in the United States and Germany systematically analyzed bibliographic data and compared the codes on which the data were based. Major and minor differences in cataloging rules were identified. The REUSE group proposed German participation in international authority files and changes in RAK, the German cataloging rules. In REUSE+ the different types of hierarchical bibliographic structures in USMARC and MAB2 and other German formats were analyzed. The German project group made suggestions concerning both the German formats and the USMARC format. Steps toward rule alignment and harmonization of online requirements were made when the German Cataloging Rules Conference made decisions on resolutions prepared by the Working Groups on Descriptive Cataloging that dealt with titles, encoding of form titles and conference terms, prefixes in names, hierarchies, entries under persons and corporate bodies, and the conceptual basis of RAK2 in the context of harmonization. Although problems remain, German rule makers have made progress toward internationality.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.02160779 = product of:
  0.10803895 = sum of:
    0.10803895 = product of:
      0.2160779 = sum of:
        0.2160779 = weight(_text_:german in 4118) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.2160779 = score(doc=4118,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.24051933 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.808009 = idf(docFreq=360, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041411664 = queryNorm
            0.8983806 = fieldWeight in 4118, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.808009 = idf(docFreq=360, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4118)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

0.018712897 = product of:
  0.09356448 = sum of:
    0.09356448 = product of:
      0.18712896 = sum of:
        0.18712896 = weight(_text_:german in 5440) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.18712896 = score(doc=5440,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.24051933 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.808009 = idf(docFreq=360, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041411664 = queryNorm
            0.77802044 = fieldWeight in 5440, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              5.808009 = idf(docFreq=360, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5440)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

Monika Münnich discusses her professional development and involvement in IFLA. The value and importance of becoming professionally involved on an international level is emphasized, in particular because of the growing internationalization of librarianship. The interview turns to the current cataloging situation in Germany, and a comparison between American and German cataloging culture follows. RAK (the German cataloging rules, the Regeln für die alphabetische Katalogisierung) and AACR2 are compared, as well as the computer cataloging formats MARC and MAB. The interview concludes with a summary of the recent turn of events in Germany, with a preliminary decision being made on a national level to formally introduce AACR2 in German libraries.

0.009260482 = product of:
  0.046302408 = sum of:
    0.046302408 = product of:
      0.092604816 = sum of:
        0.092604816 = weight(_text_:german in 5755) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.092604816 = score(doc=5755,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.24051933 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.808009 = idf(docFreq=360, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041411664 = queryNorm
            0.38502026 = fieldWeight in 5755, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.808009 = idf(docFreq=360, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5755)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Abstract

This article discusses the training of catalog librarians in Germany and Austria. First, the various library careers and degrees are described; then the various types of library schools and the varying educational content of different degree programs are described, along with continuing education programs in both countries. Typical job categories in German and Austrian libraries are described in terms of the qualification levels required in each category. Since the question of whether to retain the current official cataloguing code is now a subject of intense debate (with a potentially significant impact on library education,) the main points of that debate are outlined here. Mention is made of the manuals and textbooks currently used in cataloguing courses.

0.0078549925 = product of:
  0.03927496 = sum of:
    0.03927496 = product of:
      0.07854992 = sum of:
        0.07854992 = weight(_text_:22 in 4594) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07854992 = score(doc=4594,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1450166 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041411664 = queryNorm
            0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 4594, 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=4594)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Date

21. 9.1996 16:03:22

0.0044885674 = product of:
  0.022442836 = sum of:
    0.022442836 = product of:
      0.044885673 = sum of:
        0.044885673 = weight(_text_:22 in 2502) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.044885673 = score(doc=2502,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1450166 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041411664 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2502, 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=2502)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)

Source

Bibliotheksdienst. 22(1988) H.9, S.841-856