Search (2 results, page 1 of 1)

0.047683053 = product of:
  0.095366105 = sum of:
    0.095366105 = sum of:
      0.053292118 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 104) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.053292118 = score(doc=104,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051756795 = queryNorm
          0.26126182 = fieldWeight in 104, 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=104)
      0.042073987 = weight(_text_:22 in 104) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042073987 = score(doc=104,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18124348 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.051756795 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 104, 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=104)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Although the Alzheimer's Association's Green-Field Library's catalog has been available to local chapters and interested people for some time through modem access, placing the catalog on the World Wide Web would make it available to casual browsers as well as determined searchers. When a review of the subject list revealed numerous inconsistencies and duplications, a new list was generated, giving preference to Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) where possible. The result was a mix of MeSH and Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH), augmented by a few local- and reviewer-supplied terms. The new subject authority list gives the Green-Field Library an authoritative list of terms to use when performing original and copy cataloging. It can also be placed with the library's catalog on the Web to aid users in performing searches.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.010990939 = product of:
  0.021981878 = sum of:
    0.021981878 = product of:
      0.043963756 = sum of:
        0.043963756 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 5561) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043963756 = score(doc=5561,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.20397975 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051756795 = queryNorm
            0.21553001 = fieldWeight in 5561, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=5561)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

The 36th Allerton Institute, sponsored by the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign Graduate School of Library and Information Science was held at the University of Illinois Conference Center near Monticello, Illinois on October 23-25, 1994. The theme centered around new roles for library classification in the electronic age. Representatives of six of the world's most used library classifications presented papers and demonstrations to show how traditional uses for shelf arrangement will be expanded to include uses on the Internet, World Wide Web, Library homepages and in other networks. Several of these papers will be included in this issue of Cataloging & Classification Quarterly: Joan S. Mitchell for Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC), Ia Mcllwaine for the Universal Decimal Classification (UDC), Eric Coates for both the Broad System of Ordering (BSO) and the Bliss Classification (BC). (Other issues of this journal will cover the National Library of Medicine and Library of Congress Classification.) An international trio of keynote addresses by Lois Chan, Ingetraut Dahlberg, and Pat Moholt faced the future and found several roles for library classification systems if they can match the growing need for organization of electronic resources. Several panels representing varying viewpoints was the vehicle for hearing from participants at the Allerton Conference. Some of these discussions were covered by student reporters and are included in this issue (Ann Marie Ziadie for the discussion of networks abroad; Shirley Lincicum for those discussing non-traditional uses of classification; and Brendan Wyly for those focusing on information networks). Janet Swan Hill's paper, included here, is representative of the panel of library administrators. The closing remarks by Marcia Bates and Sarah Thomas pointed to a dozen directional signals for those interested in a more meaningful role for library classification in the world of electronic information resources:

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 21(1995) no.2, S.3-4