Search (1513 results, page 1 of 76)

  • × type_ss:"a"
  • × year_i:[2000 TO 2010}
  1. Genereux, C.: Building connections : a review of the serials literature 2004 through 2005 (2007) 0.17 
    0.16989057 = product of:
  0.25483584 = sum of:
    0.101712465 = weight(_text_:electronic in 2548) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.101712465 = score(doc=2548,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.19623034 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05019314 = queryNorm
        0.518332 = fieldWeight in 2548, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2548)
    0.15312338 = sum of:
      0.11232051 = weight(_text_:publishing in 2548) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.11232051 = score(doc=2548,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.24522576 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.885643 = idf(docFreq=907, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05019314 = queryNorm
          0.45802903 = fieldWeight in 2548, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            4.885643 = idf(docFreq=907, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2548)
      0.040802862 = weight(_text_:22 in 2548) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.040802862 = score(doc=2548,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17576782 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05019314 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2548, 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=2548)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    This review of 2004 and 2005 serials literature covers the themes of cost, management, and access. Interwoven through the serials literature of these two years are the importance of collaboration, communication, and linkages between scholars, publishers, subscription agents and other intermediaries, and librarians. The emphasis in the literature is on electronic serials and their impact on publishing, libraries, and vendors. In response to the crisis of escalating journal prices and libraries' dissatisfaction with the Big Deal licensing agreements, Open Access journals and publishing models were promoted. Libraries subscribed to or licensed increasing numbers of electronic serials. As a result, libraries sought ways to better manage licensing and subscription data (not handled by traditional integrated library systems) by implementing electronic resources management systems. In order to provide users with better, faster, and more current information on and access to electronic serials, libraries implemented tools and services to provide A-Z title lists, title by title coverage data, MARC records, and OpenURL link resolvers.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  2. Oppenheim, C.: Electronic scholarly publishing and open access (2009) 0.17 
    0.16685896 = product of:
  0.25028843 = sum of:
    0.07192158 = weight(_text_:electronic in 3662) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07192158 = score(doc=3662,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.19623034 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05019314 = queryNorm
        0.3665161 = fieldWeight in 3662, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3662)
    0.17836685 = sum of:
      0.13756399 = weight(_text_:publishing in 3662) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.13756399 = score(doc=3662,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.24522576 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.885643 = idf(docFreq=907, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05019314 = queryNorm
          0.56096876 = fieldWeight in 3662, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            4.885643 = idf(docFreq=907, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3662)
      0.040802862 = weight(_text_:22 in 3662) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.040802862 = score(doc=3662,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17576782 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05019314 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3662, 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=3662)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    A review of recent developments in electronic publishing, with a focus on Open Access (OA) is provided. It describes the two main types of OA, i.e. the `gold' OA journal route and the 'green' repository route, highlighting the advantages and disadvantages of the two, and the reactions of the publishing industry to these developments. Quality, cost and copyright issues are explored, as well as some of the business models of OA. It is noted that whilst so far there is no evidence that a shift to OA will lead to libraries cancelling subscriptions to toll-access journals, this may happen in the future, and that despite the apparently compelling reasons for authors to move to OA, so far few have shown themselves willing to do so. Conclusions about the future of scholarly publications are drawn.
    Date
    8. 7.2010 19:22:45
  3. Atkinson, R.: ¬A rationale for the redesign of scholarly information exchange (2000) 0.14 
    0.13598642 = product of:
  0.20397961 = sum of:
    0.050856233 = weight(_text_:electronic in 181) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.050856233 = score(doc=181,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19623034 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05019314 = queryNorm
        0.259166 = fieldWeight in 181, 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=181)
    0.15312338 = sum of:
      0.11232051 = weight(_text_:publishing in 181) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.11232051 = score(doc=181,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.24522576 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.885643 = idf(docFreq=907, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05019314 = queryNorm
          0.45802903 = fieldWeight in 181, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            4.885643 = idf(docFreq=907, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=181)
      0.040802862 = weight(_text_:22 in 181) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.040802862 = score(doc=181,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17576782 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05019314 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 181, 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=181)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    The disintermediation that will inevitably result from the increased electronic publication of specialized scholarly information affords an excellent opportunity for one of the traditional intermediaries (e.g., libraries, publishers) to assume responsibilities previously held by other intermediaries. Members of the academy should use this opportunity to take back the responsibility for a significant portion of the specialized scholarly publishing that has, in the traditional environment, been placed in the hands of external publishers. The most imposing impediment to such a reappropriation by the academy derives from the inability of institutions to cooperate with each other. If new attitudes could be created within the academy to circumvent that obstruction, then an academy-based process of scholarly information exchange would finally be feasible. One effective model for such a new form of scholarly publishing would be to establish separate domains, or designated channels, for individual disciplines.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  4. Bergman, M.K.: ¬The Deep Web : surfacing hidden value (2001) 0.12 
    0.12075671 = product of:
  0.18113506 = sum of:
    0.101712465 = weight(_text_:electronic in 39) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.101712465 = score(doc=39,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19623034 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05019314 = queryNorm
        0.518332 = fieldWeight in 39, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=39)
    0.0794226 = product of:
      0.1588452 = sum of:
        0.1588452 = weight(_text_:publishing in 39) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1588452 = score(doc=39,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.24522576 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.885643 = idf(docFreq=907, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05019314 = queryNorm
            0.64775085 = fieldWeight in 39, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.885643 = idf(docFreq=907, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=39)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Source
    Journal of electronic publishing. 7(2001) no.1, S.xxx-xxx
  5. Bothmann, R.: Cataloging electronic books (2004) 0.12 
    0.12052008 = product of:
  0.18078011 = sum of:
    0.15697844 = weight(_text_:electronic in 129) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.15697844 = score(doc=129,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.19623034 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05019314 = queryNorm
        0.7999703 = fieldWeight in 129, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=129)
    0.023801671 = product of:
      0.047603343 = sum of:
        0.047603343 = weight(_text_:22 in 129) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047603343 = score(doc=129,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17576782 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05019314 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 129, 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=129)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Papers on the cataloging of electronic resources have focused on electronic journals and Internet resources such as Web sites and not on electronic books. Electronic books are nonserial monographic resources accessed with a computer either directly or remotely. Rules and standards for cataloging electronic resources have changed and continue to change. This article discusses the electronic book as a unique manifestation and provides practical instruction on the application of current cataloging rules. The cataloging elements covered are control fields and variable data fields, including classification, uniform titles, title information, edition information, type and extent of the resource, publication and distribution information, physical description, series statements, notes, and subject analysis.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  6. Steenbakkers, J.F.: NEDLIB Guidelines for setting up a deposit system for electronic publications (2001) 0.11 
    0.10952209 = product of:
  0.16428313 = sum of:
    0.12457183 = weight(_text_:electronic in 6004) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12457183 = score(doc=6004,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.19623034 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05019314 = queryNorm
        0.6348245 = fieldWeight in 6004, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6004)
    0.0397113 = product of:
      0.0794226 = sum of:
        0.0794226 = weight(_text_:publishing in 6004) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0794226 = score(doc=6004,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.24522576 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.885643 = idf(docFreq=907, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05019314 = queryNorm
            0.32387543 = fieldWeight in 6004, 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=6004)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Archiving of electronic publications and providing long-term access to this information, in other words offering digital continuity, is one of the major challenges facing national libraries and national archives. From 1998-2000 a group of these institutions has joined forces with a number of publishers and ICT suppliers to search for solutions. This project named NEDLIB (Networked European Deposit Library) was co-funded by the European Commission. It had the aims to study and test the functional and technical aspects of a deposit for electronic publications. Amongst the results published by NEDLIB are: standards and a functional model for a deposit system for electronic publications, information on techniques and metadata for long-term preservation, an inventory of electronic publishing standards and also a general guidelines for setting up a deposit system for electronic publications
  7. Kling, R.: ¬The Internet and unrefereed scholarly publishing (2003) 0.11 
    0.10952209 = product of:
  0.16428313 = sum of:
    0.12457183 = weight(_text_:electronic in 4272) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12457183 = score(doc=4272,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.19623034 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05019314 = queryNorm
        0.6348245 = fieldWeight in 4272, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4272)
    0.0397113 = product of:
      0.0794226 = sum of:
        0.0794226 = weight(_text_:publishing in 4272) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0794226 = score(doc=4272,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.24522576 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.885643 = idf(docFreq=907, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05019314 = queryNorm
            0.32387543 = fieldWeight in 4272, 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=4272)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    In the early 1990s, much of the enthusiasm for the use of electronic media to enhance scholarly communication focused an electronic journals, especially electronic-only, (pure) e journals (see for example, Peek & Newby's [1996] anthology). Much of the systematic research an the use of electronic media to enhance scholarly communication also focused an electronic journals. However, by the late 1990s, numerous scientific publishers had transformed their paper journals (p journals) into paper and electronic journals (p-e journals) and sold them via subscription models that did not provide the significant costs savings, speed of access, or breadth of audience that pure e -journal advocates had expected (Okerson, 1996). In 2001, a group of senior life scientists led a campaign to have publishers make their journals freely available online six months after publication (Russo, 2001). The campaign leaders, using the name "Public Library of Science," asked scientists to boycott journals that did not comply with these demands for open access. Although the proposal was discussed in scientific magazines and conferences, it apparently did not persuade any journal publishers to comply (Young, 2002). Most productive scientists, who work for major universities and research institutes
  8. Van Epps, A.S.: ¬The evolution of electronic reference sources (2005) 0.11 
    0.10682222 = product of:
  0.16023333 = sum of:
    0.12714058 = weight(_text_:electronic in 2581) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.12714058 = score(doc=2581,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.19623034 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05019314 = queryNorm
        0.647915 = fieldWeight in 2581, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2581)
    0.03309275 = product of:
      0.0661855 = sum of:
        0.0661855 = weight(_text_:publishing in 2581) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0661855 = score(doc=2581,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.24522576 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.885643 = idf(docFreq=907, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05019314 = queryNorm
            0.26989618 = fieldWeight in 2581, 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=2581)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Purpose - To provide a historical look at the development of web versions of reference materials and discuss what makes an easy-to-use and useful electronic handbook. Design/methodology/approach - Electronic reference materials were limited to handbooks available on the web. Observations and assumptions about usability are tested with an information retrieval test for specific tasks in print and online editions of the same texts. Findings - Recommended adoption of those elements which create a well-designed book in combination with robust search capabilities and online presentation result in an easy-to-use and useful electronic reference source. Research limitations/implications - The small sample size that was used for testing limits the ability to draw conclusions, and is used only as an indication of the differences between models. A more thorough look at difference between electronic book aggregates, such as ENGnetBASE, Knovel® and Referex would highlight the best features for electronic reference materials. Practical implications - Advantages to particular models for electronic reference publishing are discussed, raising awareness for product evaluation. Areas of development for electronic reference book publishers or providers are identified. Work in these areas would help ensure maximum efficiency through cross title searching via meta-searching and data manipulation. Originality/value - The paper presents results from some human computer interaction studies about electronic books which have been implemented in a web interface, and the positive effects achieved.
  9. Kling, R.; Spector, L.B.; Fortuna, J.: ¬The Real Stakes of Virtual Publishing : The Transformation of E-Biomed Into PubMed Central (2004) 0.10 
    0.10297667 = product of:
  0.154465 = sum of:
    0.073404655 = weight(_text_:electronic in 2096) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.073404655 = score(doc=2096,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.19623034 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05019314 = queryNorm
        0.37407395 = fieldWeight in 2096, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2096)
    0.08106035 = product of:
      0.1621207 = sum of:
        0.1621207 = weight(_text_:publishing in 2096) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1621207 = score(doc=2096,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.24522576 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.885643 = idf(docFreq=907, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05019314 = queryNorm
            0.66110796 = fieldWeight in 2096, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              4.885643 = idf(docFreq=907, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2096)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    In May 1999, National Institutes of Health (NIH) Director Harold Varmus proposed an electronic repository for biomedical research literature server called "E-biomed." E-biomed reflected the visions of scholarly electronic publishing advocates: It would be fully searchable, be free to readers, and contain full-text versions of both preprint and postpublication biomedical research articles. However, within 4 months, the E-biomed proposal was radically transformed: The preprint section was eliminated, delays were instituted between article publication and posting to the archive, and the narre was changed to "PubMed Central." This case study examines the remarkable transformation of the E-biomed proposal to PubMed Central by analyzing comments about the proposal that were posted to an online E-biomed forum created by the NIH, and discussions that took place in other face-to-face forums where E-biomed deliberations took place. We find that the transformation of the E-biomed proposal into PubMed Central was the result of highly visible and highly influential position statements made by scientific societies against the proposal. The literature about scholarly electronic publishing usually emphasizes a binary conflict between (trade) publishers and scholars/scientists. We conclude that: (1) scientific societies and the individual scientists they represent do not always have identical interests in regard to scientific e-publishing; (2) stakeholder politics and personal interests reign supreme in e-publishing debates, even in a supposedly status-free online forum; and (3) multiple communication forums must be considered in examinations of e-publishing deliberations.
  10. Tenopir, C.: Electronic publishing : research issues for academic librarians and users (2003) 0.10 
    0.09616389 = product of:
  0.14424583 = sum of:
    0.088085584 = weight(_text_:electronic in 35) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.088085584 = score(doc=35,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.19623034 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05019314 = queryNorm
        0.44888872 = fieldWeight in 35, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=35)
    0.056160256 = product of:
      0.11232051 = sum of:
        0.11232051 = weight(_text_:publishing in 35) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11232051 = score(doc=35,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.24522576 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.885643 = idf(docFreq=907, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05019314 = queryNorm
            0.45802903 = fieldWeight in 35, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.885643 = idf(docFreq=907, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=35)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Increased reliance on electronic resources requires examination of the roles of librarians in several key ways. This paper addresses the need for further research into three important areas of electronic publishing. How is the change to digital information sources affecting the scholarly work of college and university students? Previous research shows that students rely on Web and online resources and ask for less help from librarians. We do not know, however, how these changes will affect the learning and scholarly work of college and university students. Research is also needed to determine how the differences between separate article and full journal databases affect the way research is done. What are the implications for scholarship of decisions being made about what publishers publish and what librarians purchase? Finally, are librarians--as intermediaries to the search process--still necessary in a digital age? Online systems are designed to be used independently but that may not always yield the best results.
  11. Moyo, L.M.: PSU Gateway Library : electronic library in transition (2004) 0.09 
    0.09497748 = product of:
  0.14246622 = sum of:
    0.11866455 = weight(_text_:electronic in 2854) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11866455 = score(doc=2854,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.19623034 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05019314 = queryNorm
        0.6047207 = fieldWeight in 2854, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2854)
    0.023801671 = product of:
      0.047603343 = sum of:
        0.047603343 = weight(_text_:22 in 2854) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047603343 = score(doc=2854,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17576782 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05019314 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2854, 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=2854)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Developments in information technology have led to changes in the mode of delivery of library services, and in the perceptions of the role of librarians in the information-seeking context. In particular, the proliferation of electronic resources has led to the emergence of new service paradigms and new roles for librarians. The Gateway Library at Penn State University (PSU) is an electronic library in transition, with new technology-based services evolving to address the ever growing and changing needs of the academic community. It facilitates access to and navigation of electronic resources in an integrated technology environment.
    Source
    Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2, S.217-226
  12. Huthwaite, A.: AACR2 and other metadata standards : the way forward (2003) 0.09 
    0.09428251 = product of:
  0.14142376 = sum of:
    0.101712465 = weight(_text_:electronic in 5508) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.101712465 = score(doc=5508,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.19623034 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05019314 = queryNorm
        0.518332 = fieldWeight in 5508, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5508)
    0.0397113 = product of:
      0.0794226 = sum of:
        0.0794226 = weight(_text_:publishing in 5508) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0794226 = score(doc=5508,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.24522576 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.885643 = idf(docFreq=907, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05019314 = queryNorm
            0.32387543 = fieldWeight in 5508, 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=5508)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Changes in the environment in which the Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules, second edition (AACR2), currently operates are examined, including the growth in electronic publishing and use of the Internet, and the development and increasing use of a range of other metadata standards, such as the Dublin Core. AACR2 and other metadata standards, particularly the Dublin Core, are compared. It is argued that AACR2 should continue to be used for describing selected Web-based resources. Criteria for deciding whether to use AACR2 or another metadata standard are defined, drawing on the experiences of two Brisbane universities in developing mechanisms for providing access to electronic resources. Five options are evaluated: catalog only (direct entry); catalog only (indirect entry); subject gateway only; catalog and subject gateway combined; and shared databases, such as CORC. The option chosen by the two universities is identified and explained. Revisions to the rules in AACR2 for cataloging electronic resources resulting from decisions made through 2000 are described. Possible future revisions are also explored.
    Content
    Beitrag in einem Themenheft "Electronic cataloging: AACR2 and metadata for serials and monographs"
  13. Rao, M.K.: Scholarly communication and electronic journals : issues and prospects for academic and research libraries (2001) 0.09 
    0.09428251 = product of:
  0.14142376 = sum of:
    0.101712465 = weight(_text_:electronic in 753) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.101712465 = score(doc=753,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.19623034 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05019314 = queryNorm
        0.518332 = fieldWeight in 753, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=753)
    0.0397113 = product of:
      0.0794226 = sum of:
        0.0794226 = weight(_text_:publishing in 753) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0794226 = score(doc=753,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.24522576 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.885643 = idf(docFreq=907, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05019314 = queryNorm
            0.32387543 = fieldWeight in 753, 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=753)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    The aim of this paper is to summarize the developments taking place in the scholarly communication system by reviewing the published literature on journal subscriptions, electronic publishing, electronic journals, Internet and changing information needs of researchers. It examines the role of different players in the scholarly communication process such as authors, commercial publishers, libraries, universities, and learned societies, their problems and efforts in meeting the new challenges brought in by the Internet. The study also explores the need for adopting electronic media for scholarly communication in place of printed journals considering the advantages such as accessibility, speed, cost and acceptance by the academic and research community. At the end it provides general guidance to authors, publishers and libraries to develop mechanisms for mutual benefit and foster the scholarly communication process in the new environment.
  14. Mizzaro, S.: Quality control in scholarly publishing : a new proposal (2003) 0.09 
    0.093802385 = product of:
  0.14070357 = sum of:
    0.07192158 = weight(_text_:electronic in 1810) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07192158 = score(doc=1810,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.19623034 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05019314 = queryNorm
        0.3665161 = fieldWeight in 1810, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1810)
    0.068781994 = product of:
      0.13756399 = sum of:
        0.13756399 = weight(_text_:publishing in 1810) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13756399 = score(doc=1810,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.24522576 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.885643 = idf(docFreq=907, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05019314 = queryNorm
            0.56096876 = fieldWeight in 1810, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              4.885643 = idf(docFreq=907, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1810)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    The Internet has fostered a faster, more interactive and effective model of scholarly publishing. However, as the quantity of information available is constantly increasing, its quality is threatened, since the traditional quality control mechanism of peer review is often not used (e.g., in online repositories of preprints, and by people publishing whatever they want an their Web pages). This paper describes a new kind of electronic scholarly journal, in which the standard submission-reviewpublication process is replaced by a more sophisticated approach, based an judgments expressed by the readers: in this way, each reader is, potentially, a peer reviewer. New ingredients, not found in similar approaches, are that each reader's judgment is weighted an the basis of the reader's skills as a reviewer, and that readers are encouraged to express correct judgments by a feedback mechanism that estimates their own quality. The new electronic scholarly journal is described in both intuitive and formal ways. Its effectiveness is tested by several laboratory experiments that simulate what might happen if the system were deployed and used.
  15. Domingue, J.; Motta, E.: PlanetOnto : from news publishing to integrated knowledge management support (2000) 0.09 
    0.09350869 = product of:
  0.28052607 = sum of:
    0.28052607 = sum of:
      0.18531938 = weight(_text_:publishing in 6872) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.18531938 = score(doc=6872,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.24522576 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.885643 = idf(docFreq=907, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05019314 = queryNorm
          0.7557093 = fieldWeight in 6872, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.885643 = idf(docFreq=907, maxDocs=44218)
            0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6872)
      0.095206685 = weight(_text_:22 in 6872) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.095206685 = score(doc=6872,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17576782 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.05019314 = queryNorm
          0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 6872, 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=6872)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    Date
    14. 8.2002 11:47:22
  16. Susol, J.: Access to information in electronic age : situation in Slovakia (2000) 0.09 
    0.085197926 = product of:
  0.12779689 = sum of:
    0.088085584 = weight(_text_:electronic in 5495) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.088085584 = score(doc=5495,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.19623034 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05019314 = queryNorm
        0.44888872 = fieldWeight in 5495, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5495)
    0.0397113 = product of:
      0.0794226 = sum of:
        0.0794226 = weight(_text_:publishing in 5495) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0794226 = score(doc=5495,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.24522576 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.885643 = idf(docFreq=907, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05019314 = queryNorm
            0.32387543 = fieldWeight in 5495, 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=5495)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Electronic publishing brings about some substantial shifts in technological as well as socio-political patterns that were in place during the era of paper publications. The tension between producer and consumer side of the information cycle is the most significant feature of this change. Authors and publishers try to maximise their revenues from the marketing of information and backed by the possibilities of technology they force major changes in legislation governing the area of (public) information access. In this environment, the society's interest in a wide-spread accessibility of electronic data must be balanced by substantial financial investments - a solution that only the rich economies of the world can feel comfortable with
  17. Reynolds, R.R.: ISSN: dumb number, smart solution (2003) 0.09 
    0.085197926 = product of:
  0.12779689 = sum of:
    0.088085584 = weight(_text_:electronic in 5514) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.088085584 = score(doc=5514,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.19623034 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05019314 = queryNorm
        0.44888872 = fieldWeight in 5514, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5514)
    0.0397113 = product of:
      0.0794226 = sum of:
        0.0794226 = weight(_text_:publishing in 5514) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0794226 = score(doc=5514,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.24522576 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.885643 = idf(docFreq=907, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05019314 = queryNorm
            0.32387543 = fieldWeight in 5514, 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=5514)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Presents an overview of the ISSN (International Standard Serial Number) in relation to current cataloging codes and evolving metadata standards. Covers the evolution and development of ISSN as a serials identifier; harmonization efforts with AACR2; the functions of identifiers in the electronic age; and the ISSN as a solution to current concerns in areas such as identification of serials and continuing resources, check-in, and obtaining metadata for electronic resources. Issues surrounding multiple manifestations and linking are also discussed. The National Serials Data Program functions as the official ISSN Center in the United States. As such, it works closely with the publishing community in assigning 5,000 to 6,000 ISSN numbers per year to American serials. The ISSN has the potential for identifying and providing access to serials and, in the near future, to many continuing resources as well.
    Content
    Beitrag in einem Themenheft "Electronic cataloging: AACR2 and metadata for serials and monographs"
  18. ChaPudhry, A.S.; Periasamy, M.: ¬A study of current practices of selected libraries in cataloguing electronic journals (2001) 0.08 
    0.084378794 = product of:
  0.12656818 = sum of:
    0.102766514 = weight(_text_:electronic in 746) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.102766514 = score(doc=746,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.19623034 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05019314 = queryNorm
        0.5237035 = fieldWeight in 746, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=746)
    0.023801671 = product of:
      0.047603343 = sum of:
        0.047603343 = weight(_text_:22 in 746) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047603343 = score(doc=746,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17576782 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05019314 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 746, 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=746)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    MARC records and online policy documents of selected libraries were reviewed to study the approaches taken by libraries worldwide to catalogue electronic journals. In general, libraries catalogue those electronic journals that are subscribed by them on priority basis. Most of them annotate the e-journal to the print record, some prefer to catalogue them separately, while the majority of the libraries adopt both approaches. While most of the libraries studied prefer full record, cataloguing e-journals separately with a brief record (at least containing MARC fields 245, 500, and 856) that identifies and locates the resource seems to be the best practice.
    Date
    22. 1.2007 20:46:57
  19. Harter, S.P.; Park, T.K.: Impact of prior electronic publication on manuscript consideration policies of scholarly journals (2000) 0.08 
    0.08157976 = product of:
  0.12236964 = sum of:
    0.09589544 = weight(_text_:electronic in 4997) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09589544 = score(doc=4997,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.19623034 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05019314 = queryNorm
        0.48868814 = fieldWeight in 4997, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4997)
    0.026474198 = product of:
      0.052948397 = sum of:
        0.052948397 = weight(_text_:publishing in 4997) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.052948397 = score(doc=4997,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.24522576 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.885643 = idf(docFreq=907, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05019314 = queryNorm
            0.21591695 = fieldWeight in 4997, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.885643 = idf(docFreq=907, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4997)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    The purpose of this research was to study current policies and practices of scholarly journals on evaluating manuscripts for publication that had been previously published electronically. Various electronic forms were considered: a manuscript having been e-mailed to members of a listserv, attached to a personal or institutional home page, stored in an electronic preprint collection, or published in an electronic proceedings or electronic journal. Factors that might affect the consideration of such manuscripts were also examined, including characteristics of the journal, the previously published work, and the submitted manuscript. A sample of 202 scholarly journals in the sciences, social sciences, and arts and humanities was selected for study. A questionnaire and cover letters were sent to the journal editors in the summer and fall of 1997, with an overall return rate of 57.4%. Results are reported for all journals, with comparisons being made between journals edited in the Unites States and outside the Unites States, by journal impact factor, and by discipline. The findings suggest that editorial policies regarding prior electronic publication are in an early stage of development. Most journal editors do not have a formal policy regarding the evaluation of work previously published in electronic form, nor are they currently evaluating such a policy. Editors disagreed widely on the importance of the various factors that might affect their decision to consider a work previously published electronically. The form or type of prior electronic publication was an important variable. Although some editors currently have a fairly rigid and negative posture towards work previously published electronically, most are willing to consider certain forms of such work for publication in their journals. Probably the most significant results of the study were the many differences in practices among scholarly disciplines. The findings of this study reveal how the Internet and the World Wide Web are currently affecting manuscript consideration policies of scholarly journals at this early stage of Web and Internet publishing
  20. Weiss, A.K.: Proliferating guidelines : a history and analysis of the cataloging of electronic resources (2003) 0.08 
    0.08140927 = product of:
  0.1221139 = sum of:
    0.101712465 = weight(_text_:electronic in 71) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.101712465 = score(doc=71,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.19623034 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05019314 = queryNorm
        0.518332 = fieldWeight in 71, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.9095051 = idf(docFreq=2409, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=71)
    0.020401431 = product of:
      0.040802862 = sum of:
        0.040802862 = weight(_text_:22 in 71) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040802862 = score(doc=71,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17576782 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05019314 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 71, 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=71)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    Abstract
    Cataloging rules for computer-based materials were first introduced in the 1970s, and since then have undergone almost continuous modification and revision. This article focuses on analysis and comparison of the various codes and guidelines for practice issued for what are now called electronic resources. Creation of new cataloging rules has been spurred by introduction of new physical carriers, the preeminence of materials accessed remotely versus those with physical carriers, the need for guidance in cataloging specific instances of computer-based materials, and the evolution of the theoretical concerns underlying the cataloging codes. Based on this history of constant change, it is easy to predict many more changes in the cataloging standards for computer-based materials in the future. However, continuous changes in the cataloging rules may have produced as much confusion as clarity for working catalogers. Caution should be exercised in the creation of new rules and standards for cataloging electronic resources, as it is possible that older rules and standards may, in fact, be readily adapted to new types of electronic resources.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22

Authors

Languages

Types

Themes