Search (3 results, page 1 of 1)

0.00793389 = product of:
  0.023801671 = sum of:
    0.023801671 = product of:
      0.047603343 = sum of:
        0.047603343 = weight(_text_:22 in 3018) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047603343 = score(doc=3018,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17576782 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05019314 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3018, 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=3018)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Date

22. 2.2008 14:21:53

0.0056506926 = product of:
  0.016952077 = sum of:
    0.016952077 = weight(_text_:electronic in 2312) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016952077 = score(doc=2312,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19623034 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05019314 = queryNorm
        0.08638867 = fieldWeight in 2312, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2312)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Footnote

Ton Heijligers reflects an the relation of the IME ICC effort to AACR and calls for an examination of the principles and function of the concept of main entry in his brief paper "Main entry into the future?" Ingrid Parent's article "From ISBD (S) to ISBD(CR): a voyage of discovery and alignment" is reprinted from Serials Librarian as it tells of the successful project not only to revise an ISBD, but also to harmonize three Codes for serials cataloguing: ISBD (CR), ISSN and AACR. Gunilla Jonsson's paper "The bibliographic unit in the digital context" is a perceptive discussion of level of granularity issues which must be addressed in deciding what to catalogue. Practical issues and user expectation are important considerations, whether the material to be catalogued is digital or analog. Ann Huthwaite's paper "Class of materials concept and GMDs" as well as Tom Delsey's ensuing comments, originated as Joint Steering Committee restricted papers in 2002. It is a great service to have them made widely available in this form as they raise fundamental issues and motivate work that has since taken place, leading to the current major round of revision to AACR. The GMD issue is about more than a list of terms and their placement in the cataloguing record, it is intertwined with consideration of whether the concept of classes of materials is helpful in organizing cataloguing rules, if so, which classes are needed, and how to allow for eventual integration of new types of materials. Useful in the Code comparison exercise is an extract of the section an access points from the draft of revised RAK (German cataloguing rules). Four short papers compare aspects of the Russian Cataloguing Rules with RAK and AACR: Tatiana Maskhoulia covers corporate body headings; Elena Zagorskaya outlines current development an serials and other continuing resources; Natalia N. Kasparova covers multilevel structures; Ljubov Ermakova and Tamara Bakhturina describe the uniform title and GMD provisions. The website includes one more item by Kasparova "Bibliographic record language in multilingual electronic communication." The volume is rounded out by the appendix which includes the conference agenda, the full list of participants, and the reports from the five working groups. Not for the casual reader, this volume is a must read for anyone working an cataloguing code development at the national or international levels, as well as those teaching cataloguing. Any practising cataloguer will benefit from reading the draft statement of principles and the three presentation papers, and dipping into the background papers."

0.0044123665 = product of:
  0.013237099 = sum of:
    0.013237099 = product of:
      0.026474198 = sum of:
        0.026474198 = weight(_text_:publishing in 439) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026474198 = score(doc=439,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.24522576 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.885643 = idf(docFreq=907, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05019314 = queryNorm
            0.10795847 = fieldWeight in 439, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.885643 = idf(docFreq=907, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=439)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Footnote

In the next four chapters, Crowley takes on the particulars involved in the divide by looking at library and information professionals engaged in and transitioning to various research and theory development roles. In "The Academic as Practitioner," he examines how the publishing world influences how academics communicate with practitioners and the difficulties in writing for practitioner-oriented publications. The history of religion in the development of higher education in general, and the research focus of doctoral-degree granting institutions, is offered to explain the dominance of the academic practitioner. The paradoxical edicts of the Ohio legislature, which sought to balance classroom time for professors by law, paint a vivid picture of the results-oriented public and the research-oriented academic institution. In "The Practitioner as Academic: Adjunct Faculty/Lecturers," the question of the perceived lack of "rigor" in practitioner-conducted research is illustrated and illuminated. While Crowley points out the value of "how we did it good" research, as providing material for qualitative analysis, I found myself desiring a bit more methodological instruction. Given where and when such articles are published, how such qualitative analysis could be conducted called the value of this research into question, given the prior treatise on conducting research in an academic environment. "Other Worlds of Practice: The Field Practitioner" and "Other Worlds of Practice: The Consultant" are extremely short expositions which, while addressing alternative professionals' roles, do not significantly further the premise of the work. Nonetheless, Crowley might have been considered remiss if he had excluded these professionals.