-
Yee, M.M.: New perspectives on the shared cataloging environment and a MARC 21 shopping list (2004)
0.09
0.089585766 = product of:
0.17917153 = sum of:
0.17917153 = sum of:
0.12307288 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 132) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.12307288 = score(doc=132,freq=6.0), product of:
0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.051756795 = queryNorm
0.6033583 = fieldWeight in 132, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=132)
0.05609865 = weight(_text_:22 in 132) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05609865 = score(doc=132,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18124348 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.051756795 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 132, 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=132)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- This paper surveys the cataloging literature to collect problems that have been identified with the MARC 21 format. The problems are sorted into (1) problems that are not the fault of MARC 21; (2) problems that perhaps are not problems at all; (3) problems that are connected with the current shared cataloging environment; and 4) other problems with MARC 21 and vendor implementation of it. The author makes recommendations to deal with the true MARC 21 problems that remain after this analysis.
- Date
- 10. 9.2000 17:38:22
-
Ranta, J.A.: Queens Borough Public Library's Guidelines for cataloging community information (1996)
0.07
0.06850691 = product of:
0.13701382 = sum of:
0.13701382 = sum of:
0.08792751 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 6523) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08792751 = score(doc=6523,freq=4.0), product of:
0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.051756795 = queryNorm
0.43106002 = fieldWeight in 6523, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=6523)
0.049086317 = weight(_text_:22 in 6523) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049086317 = score(doc=6523,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18124348 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.051756795 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 6523, 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=6523)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 22(1996) no.2, S.51-69
-
Crook, M.: Barbara Tillett discusses cataloging rules and conceptual models (1996)
0.06
0.05563023 = product of:
0.11126046 = sum of:
0.11126046 = sum of:
0.06217414 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 7683) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06217414 = score(doc=7683,freq=2.0), product of:
0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.051756795 = queryNorm
0.30480546 = fieldWeight in 7683, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=7683)
0.049086317 = weight(_text_:22 in 7683) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049086317 = score(doc=7683,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18124348 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.051756795 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 7683, 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=7683)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- OCLC newsletter. 1996, no.220, S.20-22
-
Riva, P.: Mapping MARC 21 linking entry fields to FRBR and Tillett's taxonomy of bibliographic relationships (2004)
0.05
0.047683053 = product of:
0.095366105 = sum of:
0.095366105 = sum of:
0.053292118 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 136) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.053292118 = score(doc=136,freq=2.0), product of:
0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.051756795 = queryNorm
0.26126182 = fieldWeight in 136, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=136)
0.042073987 = weight(_text_:22 in 136) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042073987 = score(doc=136,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18124348 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.051756795 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 136, 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=136)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Bibliographic relationships have taken on even greater importance in the context of ongoing efforts to integrate concepts from the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) into cataloging codes and database structures. In MARC 21, the linking entry fields are a major mechanism for expressing relationships between bibliographic records. Taxonomies of bibliographic relationships have been proposed by Tillett, with an extension by Smiraglia, and in FRBR itself. The present exercise is to provide a detailed bidirectional mapping of the MARC 21 linking fields to these two schemes. The correspondence of the Tillett taxonomic divisions to the MARC categorization of the linking fields as chronological, horizontal, or vertical is examined as well. Application of the findings to MARC format development and system functionality is discussed.
- Date
- 10. 9.2000 17:38:22
-
Lee, S.; Jacob, E.K.: ¬An integrated approach to metadata interoperability : construction of a conceptual structure between MARC and FRBR (2011)
0.05
0.047683053 = product of:
0.095366105 = sum of:
0.095366105 = sum of:
0.053292118 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 302) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.053292118 = score(doc=302,freq=2.0), product of:
0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.051756795 = queryNorm
0.26126182 = fieldWeight in 302, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=302)
0.042073987 = weight(_text_:22 in 302) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042073987 = score(doc=302,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18124348 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.051756795 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 302, 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=302)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Machine-Readable Cataloging (MARC) is currently the most broadly used bibliographic standard for encoding and exchanging bibliographic data. However, MARC may not fully support representation of the dynamic nature and semantics of digital resources because of its rigid and single-layered linear structure. The Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) model, which is designed to overcome the problems of MARC, does not provide sufficient data elements and adopts a predetermined hierarchy. A flexible structure for bibliographic data with detailed data elements is needed. Integrating MARC format with the hierarchical structure of FRBR is one approach to meet this need. The purpose of this research is to propose an approach that can facilitate interoperability between MARC and FRBR by providing a conceptual structure that can function as a mediator between MARC data elements and FRBR attributes.
- Date
- 10. 9.2000 17:38:22
-
Parker, V.: MARC tags for cataloging cartographic materials (1999)
0.04
0.0444101 = product of:
0.0888202 = sum of:
0.0888202 = product of:
0.1776404 = sum of:
0.1776404 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 5317) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.1776404 = score(doc=5317,freq=8.0), product of:
0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.051756795 = queryNorm
0.87087274 = fieldWeight in 5317, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5317)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- This is a table of those MARC fields most frequently used when cataloging cartographic materials. The table gives fields both for monographs and for serials.
- Footnote
- Teil eines Themenheftes zu: "Maps and related cartographic materials: cataloging, classification, and bibliographic control"
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 27(1999) nos.1/2, S.5-9
-
Sandberg-Fox, A.M.: ¬The microcomputer revolution (2001)
0.04
0.038073726 = product of:
0.07614745 = sum of:
0.07614745 = product of:
0.1522949 = sum of:
0.1522949 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 5409) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.1522949 = score(doc=5409,freq=12.0), product of:
0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.051756795 = queryNorm
0.7466178 = fieldWeight in 5409, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5409)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- With the introduction of the microcomputer in the 1980s, a revolution of sorts was initiated. In libraries this was evidenced by the acquisition of personal computers and the software to run on them. All that catalogers needed were cataloging rules and a MARC format to ensure their bibliographic control. However, little did catalogers realize they were dealing with an industry that introduced rapid technological changes, which effected continual revision of existing rules and the formulation of special guidelines to deal with the industry's innovative products. This article focuses on the attempts of libraries and organized cataloging groups to develop the Chapter 9 descriptive cataloging rules in AACR2; it highlights selected events and includes cataloging examples that illustrate the evolution of the chapter.
- Footnote
- Beitrag eines Themenheftes "The audiovisual cataloging current; Part I"
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 31(2001) no.2, S.85-100
-
Maxwell, R.L.: Bibliographic control (2009)
0.03
0.0297912 = product of:
0.0595824 = sum of:
0.0595824 = product of:
0.1191648 = sum of:
0.1191648 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 3750) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.1191648 = score(doc=3750,freq=10.0), product of:
0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.051756795 = queryNorm
0.5841992 = fieldWeight in 3750, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3750)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Bibliographic control is the process of creation, exchange, preservation, and use of data about information resources. Formal bibliographic control has been practiced for millennia, but modern techniques began to be developed and implemented in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. A series of cataloging codes characterized this period. These codes governed the creation of library catalogs, first in book form, then on cards, and finally in electronic formats, including MAchine-Readable Cataloging (MARC). The period was also characterized by the rise of shared cataloging programs, allowing the development of resource-saving copy cataloging procedures. Such programs were assisted by the development of cataloging networks such as OCLC and RLG. The twentieth century saw progress in the theory of bibliographic control, including the 1961 Paris Principles, culminating with the early twenty-first century Statement of International Cataloguing Principles and IFLA's Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR). Toward the end of the period bibliographic control began to be applied to newly invented electronic media, as "metadata." Trends point toward continued development of collaborative and international approaches to bibliographic control.
-
Samples, J.; Bigelow, I.: MARC to BIBFRAME : converting the PCC to Linked Data (2020)
0.03
0.026922192 = product of:
0.053844385 = sum of:
0.053844385 = product of:
0.10768877 = sum of:
0.10768877 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 119) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.10768877 = score(doc=119,freq=6.0), product of:
0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.051756795 = queryNorm
0.52793854 = fieldWeight in 119, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=119)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- The Program for Cooperative Cataloging (PCC) has formal relationships with the Library of Congress (LC), Share-VDE, and Linked Data for Production Phase 2 (LD4P2) for work on Bibliographic Framework (BIBFRAME), and PCC institutions have been very active in the exploration of MARC to BIBFRAME conversion processes. This article will review the involvement of PCC in the development of BIBFRAME and examine the work of LC, Share-VDE, and LD4P2 on MARC to BIBFRAME conversion. It will conclude with a discussion of areas for further exploration by the PCC leading up to the creation of PCC conversion specifications and PCC BIBFRAME data.
- Footnote
- Beitrag in einem Themenheft: 'Program for Cooperative Cataloging (PCC): 25 Years Strong and Growing!'.
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 58(2020) no.3/4, S.403-417
-
Hsieh-Yee, I.: Organizing audiovisual and electronic resources for access : a cataloging guide (2000)
0.03
0.026646059 = product of:
0.053292118 = sum of:
0.053292118 = product of:
0.106584236 = sum of:
0.106584236 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 5754) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.106584236 = score(doc=5754,freq=2.0), product of:
0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.051756795 = queryNorm
0.52252364 = fieldWeight in 5754, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=5754)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
-
Ferguson, B.: MARC/AACR2/authority control tagging : a blitz cataloging workbook (2005)
0.03
0.026646059 = product of:
0.053292118 = sum of:
0.053292118 = product of:
0.106584236 = sum of:
0.106584236 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 4602) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.106584236 = score(doc=4602,freq=2.0), product of:
0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.051756795 = queryNorm
0.52252364 = fieldWeight in 4602, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4602)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
-
Fiander, D. J.: Applying XML to the bibliographic description (2001)
0.03
0.026646059 = product of:
0.053292118 = sum of:
0.053292118 = product of:
0.106584236 = sum of:
0.106584236 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 5441) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.106584236 = score(doc=5441,freq=8.0), product of:
0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.051756795 = queryNorm
0.52252364 = fieldWeight in 5441, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5441)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Over the past few years there has been a significant amount of work in the area of cataloging internet resources, primarily using new metadata standards like the Dublin Core, but there has been little work on applying new data description formats like SGML and XML to traditional cataloging practices. What little work has been done in the area of using SGML and XML for traditional bibliographic description has primarily been based on the concept of converting MARC tagging into XML tagging. I suggest that, rather than attempting to convert existing MARC tagging into a new syntax based on SGML or XML, a more fruitful possibility is to return to the cataloging standards and describe their inherent structure, learning from how MARC has been used successfully in modern OPAC while attempting to avoid MARC's rigid field-based restrictions.
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 33(2001) no.2, S.17-28
-
Chapman, L.: How to catalogue : a practical manual using AACR2 and Library of Congress (1990)
0.03
0.025122147 = product of:
0.050244294 = sum of:
0.050244294 = product of:
0.10048859 = sum of:
0.10048859 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 6081) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.10048859 = score(doc=6081,freq=4.0), product of:
0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.051756795 = queryNorm
0.49264002 = fieldWeight in 6081, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6081)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- LCSH
- Cataloging
- Subject
- Cataloging
-
Tosaka, Y.; Park, J.-r.: RDA: Resource description & access : a survey of the current state of the art (2013)
0.02
0.024826001 = product of:
0.049652003 = sum of:
0.049652003 = product of:
0.099304006 = sum of:
0.099304006 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 677) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.099304006 = score(doc=677,freq=10.0), product of:
0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.051756795 = queryNorm
0.48683268 = fieldWeight in 677, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=677)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- Resource Description & Access (RDA) is intended to provide a flexible and extensible framework that can accommodate all types of content and media within rapidly evolving digital environments while also maintaining compatibility with the Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules, 2nd edition (AACR2). The cataloging community is grappling with practical issues in navigating the transition from AACR2 to RDA; there is a definite need to evaluate major subject areas and broader themes in information organization under the new RDA paradigm. This article aims to accomplish this task through a thorough and critical review of the emerging RDA literature published from 2005 to 2011. The review mostly concerns key areas of difference between RDA and AACR2, the relationship of the new cataloging code to metadata standards, the impact on encoding standards such as Machine-Readable Cataloging (MARC), end user considerations, and practitioners' views on RDA implementation and training. Future research will require more in-depth studies of RDA's expected benefits and the manner in which the new cataloging code will improve resource retrieval and bibliographic control for users and catalogers alike over AACR2. The question as to how the cataloging community can best move forward to the post-AACR2/MARC environment must be addressed carefully so as to chart the future of bibliographic control in the evolving environment of information production, management, and use.
-
Weber, R.: "Functional requirements for bibliographic records" und Regelwerksentwicklung (2001)
0.02
0.024543159 = product of:
0.049086317 = sum of:
0.049086317 = product of:
0.098172635 = sum of:
0.098172635 = weight(_text_:22 in 6838) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.098172635 = score(doc=6838,freq=2.0), product of:
0.18124348 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.051756795 = queryNorm
0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 6838, 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=6838)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Dialog mit Bibliotheken. 13(2001) H.3, S.20-22
-
Leazer, G.H.: Recent research on the sequential bibliographic relationship and its implications for standards and the library catalog : an examination of serials (1996)
0.02
0.021981878 = product of:
0.043963756 = sum of:
0.043963756 = product of:
0.08792751 = sum of:
0.08792751 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 5579) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08792751 = score(doc=5579,freq=4.0), product of:
0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.051756795 = queryNorm
0.43106002 = fieldWeight in 5579, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5579)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Footnote
- Beitrag eines Themenheftes "Cataloging and Classification Standards and Rules"
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 21(1996) nos.3/4, S.205-220
-
Boruah, B.B.; Ravikumar, S.; Gayang, F.L.: Consistency, extent, and validation of the utilization of the MARC 21 bibliographic standard in the college libraries of Assam in India (2023)
0.02
0.021981878 = product of:
0.043963756 = sum of:
0.043963756 = product of:
0.08792751 = sum of:
0.08792751 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 1183) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08792751 = score(doc=1183,freq=4.0), product of:
0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.051756795 = queryNorm
0.43106002 = fieldWeight in 1183, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1183)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- This paper brings light to the existing practice of cataloging in the college libraries of Assam in terms of utilizing the MARC 21 standard and its structure, i.e., the tags, subfield codes, and indicators. Catalog records from six college libraries are collected and a survey is conducted to understand the local users' information requirements for the catalog. Places, where libraries have scope to improve and which divisions of tags could be more helpful for them in information retrieval, are identified and suggested. This study fulfilled the need for local-level assessment of the catalogs.
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 61(2023) no.7-8, S.815-832
-
Tennant, R.: ¬A bibliographic metadata infrastructure for the twenty-first century (2004)
0.02
0.019833868 = product of:
0.039667737 = sum of:
0.039667737 = product of:
0.07933547 = sum of:
0.07933547 = weight(_text_:22 in 2845) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07933547 = score(doc=2845,freq=4.0), product of:
0.18124348 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.051756795 = queryNorm
0.4377287 = fieldWeight in 2845, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2845)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Date
- 9.12.2005 19:22:38
- Source
- Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2, S.175-181
-
McBride, J.L.: Faceted subject access for music through USMARC : a case for linked fields (2000)
0.02
0.01884161 = product of:
0.03768322 = sum of:
0.03768322 = product of:
0.07536644 = sum of:
0.07536644 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 5403) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07536644 = score(doc=5403,freq=4.0), product of:
0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.051756795 = queryNorm
0.36948 = fieldWeight in 5403, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5403)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Abstract
- The USMARC Format for Bibliographic Description contains three fields (045, 047, and 048) designed to facilitate subject access to music materials. The fields cover three of the main aspects of subject description for music: date of composition, form or genre, and number of instruments or voices, respectively. The codes are rarely used for subject access, because of the difficulty of coding them and because false drops would result in retrieval of bibliographic records where more than one musical work is present, a situation that occurs frequently with sound recordings. It is proposed that the values of the fields be converted to natural language and that subfield 8 be used to link all access fields in a bibliographic record for greater precision in retrieval. This proposal has implications beyond music cataloging, especially for metadata and any bibliographic records describing materials containing many works and subjects.
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 31(2000) no.1, S.15-30
-
Hopkins, J.: USMARC as metadata shell (1999)
0.02
0.01776404 = product of:
0.03552808 = sum of:
0.03552808 = product of:
0.07105616 = sum of:
0.07105616 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 933) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07105616 = score(doc=933,freq=2.0), product of:
0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.051756795 = queryNorm
0.3483491 = fieldWeight in 933, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=933)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
- Source
- Journal of Internet cataloging. 2(1999) no.1, S.55-68
