Search (11 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × theme_ss:"Formalerschließung"
  • × theme_ss:"Katalogfragen allgemein"
  1. Cossham, A.F.: Models of the bibliographic universe (2017) 0.02
    0.019777425 = product of:
      0.059332274 = sum of:
        0.059332274 = weight(_text_:electronic in 3817) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.059332274 = score(doc=3817,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19623034 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05019314 = queryNorm
            0.30236036 = fieldWeight in 3817, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3817)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    What kinds of mental models do library catalogue users have of the bibliographic universe in an age of online and electronic information? Using phenomenography and grounded analysis, it identifies participants' understanding, experience, and conceptualisation of the bibliographic universe, and identifies their expectations when using library catalogues. It contrasts participants' mental models with existing LIS models, and explores the nature of the bibliographic universe. The bibliographic universe can be considered to be a social object that exists because it is inscribed in catalogue records, cataloguing codes, bibliographies, and other bibliographic tools. It is a socially constituted phenomenon.
  2. Rijk Spanhoff, E. de: Principle issues : catalog paradigms, old and new (2002) 0.02
    0.016952079 = product of:
      0.050856233 = sum of:
        0.050856233 = weight(_text_:electronic in 5481) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.050856233 = score(doc=5481,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19623034 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05019314 = queryNorm
            0.259166 = fieldWeight in 5481, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5481)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Recent attempts to assess the adequacy of AACR as a descriptive cataloging code for the online environment have focused attention on cataloging principles. This paper looks at some old and new attempts to isolate the fundamental principles underlying AACR. It considers catalog objectives, principles, and rules and looks at how these relate to one another. It analyzes the relationship of these principles and rules to the final product, the library catalog, pointing out differences (in this regard) between catalogs that are paper-based and those that are electronic. Finally, it comments on the present effort of the Joint Steering Committee for Revision of AACR to formulate a statement of principles to be included in a new introduction to AACR.
  3. Petrucciani, A.: Quality of library catalogs and value of (good) catalogs (2015) 0.02
    0.015443282 = product of:
      0.046329845 = sum of:
        0.046329845 = product of:
          0.09265969 = sum of:
            0.09265969 = weight(_text_:publishing in 1878) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.09265969 = score(doc=1878,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.24522576 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.885643 = idf(docFreq=907, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05019314 = queryNorm
                0.37785465 = fieldWeight in 1878, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.885643 = idf(docFreq=907, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1878)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    The quality of large catalogs is uneven and often low, but this issue is underrated and understudied. Library catalogs often fail to communicate correct and clear information to users and their low quality is not simply due to faults, duplications, and so on but also to unwise cataloging standards and policies. While there is plenty of uncontrolled information about books and other publications, the need for good-quality bibliographic information is apparent and library catalogs may provide a trustworthy map of the publishing output, with full control of editions, works, authors, and so on and effective navigation functions, which are lacking in today's information-rich environment.
  4. Treichler, W.: Katalogisierungsregeln, Kataloge und Benützer in schweizerischen Bibliotheken (1986) 0.01
    0.013600955 = product of:
      0.040802862 = sum of:
        0.040802862 = product of:
          0.081605725 = sum of:
            0.081605725 = weight(_text_:22 in 5352) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.081605725 = score(doc=5352,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17576782 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05019314 = 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(1/3)
    
    Date
    8.10.2000 14:22:27
  5. Lubetzky, S.: Writings on the classical art of cataloging (2001) 0.01
    0.013600955 = product of:
      0.040802862 = sum of:
        0.040802862 = product of:
          0.081605725 = sum of:
            0.081605725 = weight(_text_:22 in 2622) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.081605725 = score(doc=2622,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17576782 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05019314 = 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(1/3)
    
    Footnote
    Rez. in: Technicalities 22(2002) no.1, S.19-20 (S.S. Intner)
  6. Puglisi, P.: "¬The day has not yet come ..." : book-jackets in library catalogs (2015) 0.01
    0.0132371 = product of:
      0.0397113 = sum of:
        0.0397113 = product of:
          0.0794226 = sum of:
            0.0794226 = weight(_text_:publishing in 1883) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0794226 = score(doc=1883,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.24522576 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.885643 = idf(docFreq=907, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05019314 = queryNorm
                0.32387543 = fieldWeight in 1883, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.885643 = idf(docFreq=907, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1883)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    In 1971 the eminent American scholar G. Thomas Tanselle wrote: "the day has not yet come when one can learn anything of a library's holdings of jackets by consulting its catalogue." Forty-four years later, library catalogs still do not allow that. Book-jackets, whose "original sin" is their being physically separate from the book, are nevertheless essential documents for the history of publishing. This article aims to show the necessity for access to the information about a single book's book-jacket directly from the library catalog; it considers the reasons why catalogers usually "distrust" book-jackets; and it aims to determine whether there is any change in attitude about taking book-jackets into account in cataloging.
  7. Byrd, J.; Charbonneau, G.; Charbonneau, M.; Courtney, A.; Johnson, E.; Leonard, K.; Morrison, A.; Mudge, S.; O'Bryan, A.; Opasik, S.; Riley, J.; Turchyn, S.: ¬A white paper on the future of cataloging at Indiana University (2006) 0.01
    0.011030916 = product of:
      0.03309275 = sum of:
        0.03309275 = product of:
          0.0661855 = sum of:
            0.0661855 = weight(_text_:publishing in 3225) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0661855 = score(doc=3225,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.24522576 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.885643 = idf(docFreq=907, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05019314 = queryNorm
                0.26989618 = fieldWeight in 3225, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.885643 = idf(docFreq=907, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3225)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    This is a report by a group "charged to identify current trends that will have a direct impact on cataloging operations and to define possible new roles for the online catalog and cataloging staff at Indiana University." Their one general conclusion after nine months of work is that "The need for cataloging expertise within the I.U. Libraries will not be diminished in the coming years. Rather, catalogers of the future will work in the evolving environment of publishing, scholarly communication, and information technology in new expanded roles. Catalogers will need to be key players in addressing the many challenges facing the libraries and the overall management and organization of information at Indiana University." The report also identifies five strategic directions. The report is an interesting read, and taken with the explosion of related reports (e.g., Calhoun's report to the Library of Congress cited in this issue, the UC Bibliographic Services TF Report), adds yet another perspective to the kinds of changes we must foster to create better library services in a vastly changed environment.
  8. Visintin, G.: Passaggi (1998) 0.01
    0.0090673035 = product of:
      0.02720191 = sum of:
        0.02720191 = product of:
          0.05440382 = sum of:
            0.05440382 = weight(_text_:22 in 3053) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.05440382 = score(doc=3053,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17576782 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05019314 = 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(1/3)
    
    Date
    22. 2.1999 20:40:57
  9. Marcum, D.B.: ¬The future of cataloging (2006) 0.01
    0.00793389 = product of:
      0.023801671 = sum of:
        0.023801671 = product of:
          0.047603343 = sum of:
            0.047603343 = weight(_text_:22 in 114) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.047603343 = score(doc=114,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17576782 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05019314 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 114, 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=114)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  10. Theimer, S.: ¬A cataloger's resolution to become more creative : how and why (2012) 0.01
    0.00793389 = product of:
      0.023801671 = sum of:
        0.023801671 = product of:
          0.047603343 = sum of:
            0.047603343 = weight(_text_:22 in 1934) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.047603343 = score(doc=1934,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17576782 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05019314 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1934, 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=1934)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    29. 5.2015 11:08:22
  11. Managing cataloging and the organization of information : philosophies, practices and challenges at the onset of the 21st century (2000) 0.00
    0.003966945 = product of:
      0.011900836 = sum of:
        0.011900836 = product of:
          0.023801671 = sum of:
            0.023801671 = weight(_text_:22 in 238) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.023801671 = score(doc=238,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17576782 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05019314 = queryNorm
                0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 238, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=238)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Footnote
    Rez. in ZfBB 51(2004) H.1, S.54-55 (G. Pflug): "Unter dem wachsenden Einfluss der Informationstechnologie auf den Bibliotheksbereich nimmt die Katalogisierung eine Schlüsselstellung ein. Das vorliegende Werk gliedert sich in zwei Teile. Der erste Abschnitt ist mit »National Libraries« überschrieben, befasst sich jedoch nur mit der Library of Congress und der National Library of Canada. Ihm folgen Artikel über »Libraries around the world«. Dabei fälltjedoch auf, dass diese Studien zwar Bibliotheken in Großbritannien, Australien, Mittel- und Südamerika und selbst Afrika (Botswana) behandeln, nicht jedoch aus Kontinentaleuropa, trotz entsprechender Aktivitäten etwa in den Niederlanden, in Frankreich oder den deutschsprachigen Ländern. Nur DOBIS/LIBIS wird erwähnt, aber nur, weil es für kurze Zeit die kanadische Entwicklung beeinflusst hat. Im zweiten Teil kommen Katalogisierungsfachleute aus vier Spezial- und neun akademischen Bibliotheken - ausschließlich aus Nordamerika und Großbritannien - zu Wort. So enthält das Werk in 22 Beispielen Berichte über individuelle und regionale Lösungen. Dabei steht die Frage im Vordergrund, zu welchen Änderungen in der Katalogisierungs- und Sacherschließungspraxis die neuen elektronischen Techniken geführt haben. So streben z.B. die englischen Hochschulbibliotheken ein koordiniertes System an. Mit dem Übergang der British Library zu MARC 21 wird das Katalogsystem in Großbritannien nachhaltig beeinflusst - um nur zwei nahe liegende Beispiele zu nennen. Insgesamt werden drei Aspekte behandelt, die Automatisierungstechnik; die dabei einzusetzende Kooperation und das Outsourcing - nicht nur durch Übernahme von Daten anderer Bibliotheken oder durch Verbundsysteme, vor allem der Library of Congress, sondern auch durch Buchhandelsfirmen wie Blackwell North America Authority Control Service. In der Frage der Sacherschließung befassen sich die Beiträge mit den im amerikanischen Bereich üblichen Klassifikationssystemen, vor allem der Colon Classification, Dewey in seinen beiden Formen oder der Library of Congress Classification. Für die deutsche Diskussion sind diese Aspekte vor allem wegen des Übergangs der Deutschen Bibliothek in ihrer Nationalbibliografie zur DDC von großem Interesse (vgl. Magda Heiner-Freiling: Die DDC in der Deutschen Nationalbibliografie. In Dialog mit Bibliotheken. 15. 2003, Nr. 3, S. 8-13). Doch stellen auch die unterschiedlichen Überlegungen zur alphabetischen Katalogisierung, verbunden mit den da zugehörigen Datenbanken, einen interessanten Beitrag zur augenblicklichen Diskussion in Deutschland dar, da auch hier seit einigen Jahren die Katalogisierung nach RAK und ihre Ablösung eine lebhafte Diskussion ausgelöst hat, wie unter anderem der zusammenfassende Beitrag von Elisabeth Niggemann in: Dialog mit Bibliotheken (15. 2003, Nr. 2, S. 4-8) zeigt. Auch die angloamerikanischen und die mit ihnen zum Beispiel in Mexiko, Südamerika oder Australien verbundenen Bibliotheken - das zeigt das Buch deutlich - diskutieren die Frage der alphabetischen Katalogisierung kontrovers. So werden z.B. neben den dominanten AACR-Regeln mit ihrer Weiterentwicklung mehr als zehn andere Katalogisierungssysteme und rund 20 Online-Datenbanken behandelt. Damit liefert das Buch für die Diskussion in Deutschland und die anstehenden Entscheidungen in seiner Grundtendenz wie in den unterschiedlichen-auch widersprüchlichen-Aspekten dereinzelnen Beiträge wertvolle Anregungen."