-
Oddy, P.: Future libraries, future catalogues (1996)
0.09
0.09226495 = product of:
0.27679485 = sum of:
0.10256325 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 1988) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.10256325 = score(doc=1988,freq=8.0), product of:
0.14721331 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.037353165 = queryNorm
0.6966982 = fieldWeight in 1988, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1988)
0.0660222 = weight(_text_:data in 1988) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0660222 = score(doc=1988,freq=8.0), product of:
0.118112594 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
0.037353165 = queryNorm
0.5589768 = fieldWeight in 1988, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1988)
0.10820941 = weight(_text_:processing in 1988) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.10820941 = score(doc=1988,freq=8.0), product of:
0.15121111 = queryWeight, product of:
4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
0.037353165 = queryNorm
0.7156181 = fieldWeight in 1988, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1988)
0.33333334 = coord(3/9)
- LCSH
- Cataloging / Data processing
Cataloging of nonbook materials / Data processing
- Subject
- Cataloging / Data processing
Cataloging of nonbook materials / Data processing
-
Rodman, R.L.: Making the connection between processing and access : do cataloging decisions affect user access? (2000)
0.04
0.035128772 = product of:
0.15807948 = sum of:
0.07692243 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 518) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07692243 = score(doc=518,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14721331 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.037353165 = queryNorm
0.52252364 = fieldWeight in 518, 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=518)
0.08115705 = weight(_text_:processing in 518) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08115705 = score(doc=518,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15121111 = queryWeight, product of:
4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
0.037353165 = queryNorm
0.53671354 = fieldWeight in 518, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=518)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
-
Lubetzky, S.: Cataloging rules and principles : a critique of the A.L.A. rules for entry and a proposed design for their revision (1953)
0.03
0.031761575 = product of:
0.14292708 = sum of:
0.08882238 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 2278) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08882238 = score(doc=2278,freq=6.0), product of:
0.14721331 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.037353165 = queryNorm
0.6033583 = fieldWeight in 2278, 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=2278)
0.054104704 = weight(_text_:processing in 2278) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.054104704 = score(doc=2278,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15121111 = queryWeight, product of:
4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
0.037353165 = queryNorm
0.35780904 = fieldWeight in 2278, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2278)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- Imprint
- Washington : Library of Congress, Processing Dept.
- Issue
- Prepared for the Board on Cataloging Policy and Research of the A.L.A. Division of Cataloging and Classification.
-
Aliprand, J.M.: ¬The Unicode Standard : its scope, design prin. ciples, and prospects for international cataloging (2000)
0.03
0.030296035 = product of:
0.13633215 = sum of:
0.11102797 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 4608) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.11102797 = score(doc=4608,freq=6.0), product of:
0.14721331 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.037353165 = queryNorm
0.7541979 = fieldWeight in 4608, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4608)
0.02530419 = product of:
0.05060838 = sum of:
0.05060838 = weight(_text_:22 in 4608) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05060838 = score(doc=4608,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13080442 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.037353165 = queryNorm
0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 4608, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4608)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- Date
- 10. 9.2000 17:38:22
- Footnote
- Beitrag in einem Themenheft "What in the World...Cataloging on an International Scale": papers from the ALCTS preconference, June 26, 1998 "What in the World...Cataloging on an International Scale". ALCTS Preconference, Washington, D.C.
-
Clarke, R.I.: Breaking records : the history of bibliographic records and their influence in conceptualizing bibliographic data (2015)
0.03
0.03010867 = product of:
0.13548902 = sum of:
0.077719584 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 1877) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.077719584 = score(doc=1877,freq=6.0), product of:
0.14721331 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.037353165 = queryNorm
0.52793854 = fieldWeight in 1877, 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=1877)
0.057769425 = weight(_text_:data in 1877) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.057769425 = score(doc=1877,freq=8.0), product of:
0.118112594 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
0.037353165 = queryNorm
0.48910472 = fieldWeight in 1877, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1877)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- Abstract
- A bibliographic record is a conceptual whole that includes all bibliographic information about a resource together in one place. With the Semantic Web, individual data statements are linked across the web. This position article argues that the traditional conceptualization of bibliographic records affects the affordances and limitations of that data. A historical analysis of the development of bibliographic records contrasted with the Semantic Web model reveals how the "record" model shaped library cataloging and the implications on library catalogs today. Reification of the record model for bibliographic data hampers possibilities for innovation in cataloging, inspiring a reconceptualization of bibliographic description.
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 53(2015) no.3/4, S.286-302
-
El-Sherbini, M.A.: Cataloging and classification : review of the literature 2005-06 (2008)
0.03
0.029980566 = product of:
0.13491255 = sum of:
0.1146692 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 249) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.1146692 = score(doc=249,freq=10.0), product of:
0.14721331 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.037353165 = queryNorm
0.7789323 = fieldWeight in 249, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=249)
0.020243352 = product of:
0.040486705 = sum of:
0.040486705 = weight(_text_:22 in 249) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.040486705 = score(doc=249,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13080442 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.037353165 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 249, 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=249)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- Abstract
- This paper reviews library literature on cataloging and classification published in 2005-06. It covers pertinent literature in the following areas: the future of cataloging; Functional Requirement for Bibliographic Records (FRBR); metadata and its applications and relation to Machine-Readable Cataloging (MARC); cataloging tools and standards; authority control; and recruitment, training, and the changing role of catalogers.
- Date
- 10. 9.2000 17:38:22
-
Enhancing access to information : designing catalogs for the 21st century (1992)
0.03
0.028832799 = product of:
0.086498395 = sum of:
0.032051016 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 1009) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.032051016 = score(doc=1009,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14721331 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.037353165 = queryNorm
0.21771818 = fieldWeight in 1009, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1009)
0.02063194 = weight(_text_:data in 1009) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02063194 = score(doc=1009,freq=2.0), product of:
0.118112594 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
0.037353165 = queryNorm
0.17468026 = fieldWeight in 1009, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1009)
0.03381544 = weight(_text_:processing in 1009) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03381544 = score(doc=1009,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15121111 = queryWeight, product of:
4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
0.037353165 = queryNorm
0.22363065 = fieldWeight in 1009, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1009)
0.33333334 = coord(3/9)
- Content
- Enthält die Beiträge: TYCKOSON, D.A.: Enhancing access to information: building catalogs for the future; TYCKOSON, D.A.: The twenty-first century limited: desinging catalogs for the next century; DWYER, J.: Bibliographic records enhancement: from the drawing board to the catalog screen; SYRACUSE, R.O. u. R.K. POYER: Enhancing access to the library's collections: a view from an academic health center library; STUDWELL, W.E.: Of eggs and baskets: getting more access out of LC Subject Headings in an online environment; STEPHENS, I.E.: Getting more out of call numbers: displaying holdings, locations and circulation status; MICCO, M.: The next generation of online public access catalogs: a new look at subject access using hypermedia; SLOAN, B.G.: Remote access: design implications for the online catalog; ENGEL, G.: User instruction for access to catalogs and database on the Internet; BARNES, S. u. J. McCUE: Linking library records to bibliographic databases: an analysis of common data elements in BIOSIS, Agricola and the OPAC; HARWOOD, R.: Adding a nonlibrary campus collection to the library database; CARTER, K., H. OLSEN u. S. AQUILA: Bulk loading of records for microform sets into the online catalogue; DYKEMAN, A. u. J. ZIMMERMAN: The Georgia Institute of Technology Electronic Library: issues to consider; MOLHOLT, P. u. K. FORSYTHE: Opening up information access through the electronic catalog
- Footnote
- Rez. in: Canadian journal of information and library science 1993, no. April, S.81-82 (D. Mattison); Library review 42(1993) S.48-49 (D. Anderson); Australian academic and research libraries 1993, no. March, S.55-56 (J.S. Goodell); Library resources and technical services 1993, no.1, S.102 (R.P. Holley); Knowledge organization 20(1993) no.4, S.231-232 (P.A. Cochrane); Information processing and management 33(1997) no.4, S.573-575 (C.R. Hildreth)
- Series
- Cataloging and classification quarterly; vol.13, nos.3/4
-
Payant, A.; Skeen, B.; Woolcott, L.: Initiating cultural shifts in perceptions of cataloging units through interaction assessment (2017)
0.03
0.028715614 = product of:
0.12922026 = sum of:
0.10033555 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 5157) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.10033555 = score(doc=5157,freq=10.0), product of:
0.14721331 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.037353165 = queryNorm
0.68156576 = fieldWeight in 5157, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5157)
0.028884713 = weight(_text_:data in 5157) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028884713 = score(doc=5157,freq=2.0), product of:
0.118112594 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
0.037353165 = queryNorm
0.24455236 = fieldWeight in 5157, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5157)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- Abstract
- Points of contact formulate the culture of any organization and shape the perceptions of decision makers and colleagues alike. This research project investigated the interactions between Cataloging and Metadata Services staff and other library employees by analyzing interactions. This article summarizes the results of data gathered from interaction assessments and compares them with surveys about the current perceptions of the cataloging unit at the Utah State University Libraries. It discusses the ways these results have influenced existing unit workflows to enhance awareness of cataloging and metadata contributions to the library and posits possible ways to continue such initiatives moving forward.
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 55(2017) no.7/8, S.467-492
-
Panchyshyn, R.S.; Park, A.L.: Resource Description and Access (RDA) database enrichment : the path to a hybridized catalog (2015)
0.03
0.028454656 = product of:
0.12804595 = sum of:
0.06345777 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 2017) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06345777 = score(doc=2017,freq=4.0), product of:
0.14721331 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.037353165 = queryNorm
0.43106002 = fieldWeight in 2017, 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=2017)
0.06458818 = weight(_text_:data in 2017) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06458818 = score(doc=2017,freq=10.0), product of:
0.118112594 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
0.037353165 = queryNorm
0.5468357 = fieldWeight in 2017, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2017)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- Abstract
- This article examines the benefits of a Resource Description and Access (RDA) enrichment project for libraries. Enrichment projects "hybridize", or enrich legacy Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules, Second Edition (AACR2) bibliographic records with RDA data. Until a replacement for MARC is developed, bibliographic data will continue to be encoded in MARC 21 in many integrated library systems. Library catalogs contain records coded under both AACR2 and RDA standards. RDA enrichment projects benefit the patron experience because the data is cleaner and more consistent for patron use and display, cataloging staff workflows are simplified, and the consistency of the data is advantageous for system development and data exchange with other communities
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 53(2015) no.2, S.214-233
-
DeZelar-Tiedman, V.: Doing the LibraryThing(TM) in an academic library catalog (2008)
0.03
0.028445266 = product of:
0.0853358 = sum of:
0.058708575 = weight(_text_:germany in 2666) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.058708575 = score(doc=2666,freq=2.0), product of:
0.22275731 = queryWeight, product of:
5.963546 = idf(docFreq=308, maxDocs=44218)
0.037353165 = queryNorm
0.26355398 = fieldWeight in 2666, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.963546 = idf(docFreq=308, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2666)
0.01650555 = weight(_text_:data in 2666) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01650555 = score(doc=2666,freq=2.0), product of:
0.118112594 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
0.037353165 = queryNorm
0.1397442 = fieldWeight in 2666, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2666)
0.010121676 = product of:
0.020243352 = sum of:
0.020243352 = weight(_text_:22 in 2666) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020243352 = score(doc=2666,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13080442 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.037353165 = queryNorm
0.15476047 = fieldWeight in 2666, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2666)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(3/9)
- Abstract
- Many libraries and other cultural institutions are incorporating Web 2.0 features and enhanced metadata into their catalogs (Trant 2006). These value-added elements include those typically found in commercial and social networking sites, such as book jacket images, reviews, and usergenerated tags. One such site that libraries are exploring as a model is LibraryThing (www.librarything.com) LibraryThing is a social networking site that allows users to "catalog" their own book collections. Members can add tags and reviews to records for books, as well as engage in online discussions. In addition to its service for individuals, LibraryThing offers a feebased service to libraries, where institutions can add LibraryThing tags, recommendations, and other features to their online catalog records. This poster will present data analyzing the quality and quantity of the metadata that a large academic library would expect to gain if utilizing such a service, focusing on the overlap between titles found in the library's catalog and in LibraryThing's database, and on a comparison between the controlled subject headings in the former and the user-generated tags in the latter. During February through April 2008, a random sample of 383 titles from the University of Minnesota Libraries catalog was searched in LibraryThing. Eighty works, or 21 percent of the sample, had corresponding records available in LibraryThing. Golder and Huberman (2006) outline the advantages and disadvantages of using controlled vocabulary for subject access to information resources versus the growing trend of tags supplied by users or by content creators. Using the 80 matched records from the sample, comparisons were made between the user-supplied tags in LibraryThing (social tags) and the subject headings in the library catalog records (controlled vocabulary system). In the library records, terms from all 6XX MARC fields were used. To make a more meaningful comparison, controlled subject terms were broken down into facets according to their headings and subheadings, and each unique facet counted separately. A total of 227 subject terms were applied to the 80 catalog records, an average of 2.84 per record. In LibraryThing, 698 tags were applied to the same 80 titles, an average of 8.73 per title. The poster will further explore the relationships between the terms applied in each source, and identify where overlaps and complementary levels of access occur.
- Source
- Metadata for semantic and social applications : proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications, Berlin, 22 - 26 September 2008, DC 2008: Berlin, Germany / ed. by Jane Greenberg and Wolfgang Klas
-
Wynne, S.C.; Hanscom, M.J.: ¬The effect of next-generation catalogs on catalogers and cataloging functions in academic libraries (2011)
0.03
0.028388752 = product of:
0.12774938 = sum of:
0.077719584 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 1889) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.077719584 = score(doc=1889,freq=6.0), product of:
0.14721331 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.037353165 = queryNorm
0.52793854 = fieldWeight in 1889, 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=1889)
0.050029792 = weight(_text_:data in 1889) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.050029792 = score(doc=1889,freq=6.0), product of:
0.118112594 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
0.037353165 = queryNorm
0.42357713 = fieldWeight in 1889, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1889)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- Abstract
- Next-generation catalogs or discovery tools (NGCs) overlay existing bibliographic data and repackage it in displays that differ from the traditional catalog. Many implementations of NGCs have revealed errors, omissions, or inconsistencies in the underlying data that had not been apparent in the traditional catalog. This study explored the effect of NGCs on cataloging functions and catalogers in academic libraries, examining catalogers' participation in the selection and implementation processes, identifying and correcting data problems, changes to procedures or workflow, and staffing.
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 49(2011) no.3, S.179-207
-
Marcum, D.B.: ¬The future of cataloging (2006)
0.03
0.026232997 = product of:
0.11804849 = sum of:
0.10033555 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 114) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.10033555 = score(doc=114,freq=10.0), product of:
0.14721331 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.037353165 = queryNorm
0.68156576 = fieldWeight in 114, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=114)
0.017712934 = product of:
0.035425868 = sum of:
0.035425868 = weight(_text_:22 in 114) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035425868 = score(doc=114,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13080442 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.037353165 = 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)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- Abstract
- This paper explores cataloging in the Age of Google. It considers what the technologies now being adopted mean for cataloging in the future. The author begins by exploring how digital-era students do research-they find using Google easier than using libraries. Mass digitization projects now are bringing into question the role that library cataloging has traditionally performed. The author asks readers to consider if the detailed attention librarians have been paying to descriptive cataloging can still be justified, and if cost-effective means for access should be considered.
- Date
- 10. 9.2000 17:38:22
-
Miksa, S.D.: ¬The challenges of change : a review of cataloging and classification literature, 2003-2004 (2007)
0.02
0.02423683 = product of:
0.109065734 = sum of:
0.08882238 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 266) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08882238 = score(doc=266,freq=6.0), product of:
0.14721331 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.037353165 = queryNorm
0.6033583 = fieldWeight in 266, 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=266)
0.020243352 = product of:
0.040486705 = sum of:
0.040486705 = weight(_text_:22 in 266) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.040486705 = score(doc=266,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13080442 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.037353165 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 266, 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=266)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- Abstract
- This paper reviews the enormous changes in cataloging and classification reflected in the literature of 2003 and 2004, and discusses major themes and issues. Traditional cataloging and classification tools have been re-vamped and new resources have emerged. Most notable themes are: the continuing influence of the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Control (FRBR); the struggle to understand the ever-broadening concept of an "information entity"; steady developments in metadata-encoding standards; and the globalization of information systems, including multilinguistic challenges.
- Date
- 10. 9.2000 17:38:22
-
McMillan, G.: Electronic theses and dissertations : merging perspectives (1996)
0.02
0.02387906 = product of:
0.107455775 = sum of:
0.08974284 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 601) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08974284 = score(doc=601,freq=8.0), product of:
0.14721331 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.037353165 = queryNorm
0.6096109 = fieldWeight in 601, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=601)
0.017712934 = product of:
0.035425868 = sum of:
0.035425868 = weight(_text_:22 in 601) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035425868 = score(doc=601,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13080442 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.037353165 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 601, 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=601)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- Abstract
- Theses and dissertations as electronic files transferred from the student author to the Graduate School to the Library may well be the first major source of electronic texts that many libraries encounter. To prepare for this potential influx of electronic texts, an ad hoc task force considered work flow and cataloging guidelines. The author suggests expanding current theses cataloging and taking advantage of online information prepared by authors so that the bibliographic records provide OPACS with much more valuable information than does traditional theses cataloging. This should not require a lot of extra work.
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 22(1996) nos.3/4, S.105-125
-
Martin, S.K.: ¬The union catalogue : summary and future directions (1982)
0.02
0.023841659 = product of:
0.10728746 = sum of:
0.07692243 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 290) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07692243 = score(doc=290,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14721331 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.037353165 = queryNorm
0.52252364 = fieldWeight in 290, 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=290)
0.030365027 = product of:
0.060730055 = sum of:
0.060730055 = weight(_text_:22 in 290) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.060730055 = score(doc=290,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13080442 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.037353165 = queryNorm
0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 290, 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=290)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- Date
- 6. 1.2007 14:49:22
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 2(1982) nos.1/2, S.121-125
-
Lubetzky, S.: Writings on the classical art of cataloging (2001)
0.02
0.023841659 = product of:
0.10728746 = sum of:
0.07692243 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 2622) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07692243 = score(doc=2622,freq=2.0), product of:
0.14721331 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.037353165 = queryNorm
0.52252364 = fieldWeight in 2622, 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=2622)
0.030365027 = product of:
0.060730055 = sum of:
0.060730055 = weight(_text_:22 in 2622) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.060730055 = score(doc=2622,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13080442 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.037353165 = 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)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- Footnote
- Rez. in: Technicalities 22(2002) no.1, S.19-20 (S.S. Intner)
-
Maurer, M.B.; McCutcheon, S.; Schwing, T.: Who's doing what? : findability and author-supplied ETD metadata in the library catalog (2011)
0.02
0.023689844 = product of:
0.10660429 = sum of:
0.077719584 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 1891) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.077719584 = score(doc=1891,freq=6.0), product of:
0.14721331 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.037353165 = queryNorm
0.52793854 = fieldWeight in 1891, 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=1891)
0.028884713 = weight(_text_:data in 1891) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028884713 = score(doc=1891,freq=2.0), product of:
0.118112594 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
0.037353165 = queryNorm
0.24455236 = fieldWeight in 1891, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1891)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- Abstract
- Kent State University Libraries' ETD cataloging process features contributions by authors, by the ETDcat application, and by catalogers. Who is doing what, and how much of it is findable in the library catalog? An empirical analysis is performed featuring simple frequencies within the KentLINK catalog, articulated by the use of a newly devised rubric. The researchers sought the degree to which the ETD authors, the applications, and the catalogers can supply accurate, findable metadata. Further development of combinatory cataloging processes is suggested. The method of examining the data and the rubric are provided as a framework for other metadata analysis.
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 49(2011) no.4, S.277-310
-
Jett, M.; Reuse, B.; Kessling, G.: Implementation of an online database for tables of contents of books (1998)
0.02
0.02279193 = product of:
0.10256368 = sum of:
0.073385715 = weight(_text_:germany in 1861) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.073385715 = score(doc=1861,freq=2.0), product of:
0.22275731 = queryWeight, product of:
5.963546 = idf(docFreq=308, maxDocs=44218)
0.037353165 = queryNorm
0.32944247 = fieldWeight in 1861, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.963546 = idf(docFreq=308, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1861)
0.029177967 = weight(_text_:data in 1861) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.029177967 = score(doc=1861,freq=4.0), product of:
0.118112594 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
0.037353165 = queryNorm
0.24703519 = fieldWeight in 1861, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1861)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- Abstract
- Many small libraries do not have the resources to build a holdings database but the availability of affordable scanners and improved OCR software has made possible a new approach for creating online databases. Describes the work undertaken at the Otto Hahn Library of the Max Planck Institute for Biophysical Chemistry, Germany, to create a database consisting of the titles, bibliographic descriptions and contents tables of books acquired by the library. The book information and table of contents pages are scanned and converted to text using OCR software. A computer program is used to extract as much information as possible, in particular from the CIP data with corrections and missing information being supplied manually. Finally, the information, which consists of: title; author; ISBN; publication year; call number; series; language; and other relevant information for books, as well as the entire table of contents, is stored and added to an Ovid database using the Ovid Local Loader software. Pays particular attention to the algorithm used to extract specific information from the CIP data. 2 OCR software packeges have been tested: OmniPage Pro 7.0 and FineReader 3.0. Experience has shown that FineReader is better at character recognition and retains the formatting better but OmniPage Pro is easier to train to recognize special characters
-
Barrett, B.B.: Hit rates with the OCLC CD450 cataloging system : a test with recent, academic approval books (1990)
0.02
0.022595724 = product of:
0.101680756 = sum of:
0.07692243 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 504) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07692243 = score(doc=504,freq=8.0), product of:
0.14721331 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.037353165 = queryNorm
0.52252364 = fieldWeight in 504, 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=504)
0.024758326 = weight(_text_:data in 504) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024758326 = score(doc=504,freq=2.0), product of:
0.118112594 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
0.037353165 = queryNorm
0.2096163 = fieldWeight in 504, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=504)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- Abstract
- The work begins by reviewing publications on the use of optical-disc technology in cataloging departments. This section includes descriptive information on specific products and comparative considerations on the value of the CD genre. Most commentary to date seems to find cost advantages to the optical format for smaller libraries but fewer attractions for larger institutions who would lose online immediacy. An outline of the design and results of the OCLC test follows along with various tables showing the class makeup of the overall sample, the hit-rate for the two vendors, and other data. Most of the sample consisted of English-language titles that would support the general academic mission of a variety of disciplines. Well over 90% of the titles searched had MARC records on discs within two issues or three months. Although concluding that departments acquiring over 5000 titles per year may find online utilities more effective, the article still urges a careful analysis of laser cataloging products with a variety of acquisition samples and for a variety of libraries.
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 12(1990) no.2, S.63-81
-
Clarke, R.I.: Cataloging research by design : a taxonomic approach to understanding research questions in cataloging (2018)
0.02
0.022485426 = product of:
0.10118441 = sum of:
0.086001895 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 5188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.086001895 = score(doc=5188,freq=10.0), product of:
0.14721331 = queryWeight, product of:
3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
0.037353165 = queryNorm
0.5841992 = fieldWeight in 5188, 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=5188)
0.015182514 = product of:
0.030365027 = sum of:
0.030365027 = weight(_text_:22 in 5188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030365027 = score(doc=5188,freq=2.0), product of:
0.13080442 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.037353165 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 5188, 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=5188)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.22222222 = coord(2/9)
- Abstract
- This article asserts that many research questions (RQs) in cataloging reflect design-based RQs, rather than traditional scientific ones. To support this idea, a review of existing discussions of RQs is presented to identify prominent types of RQs, including design-based RQs. RQ types are then classified into a taxonomic framework and compared with RQs from the Everyday Cataloger Concerns project, which aimed to identify important areas of research from the perspective of practicing catalogers. This comparative method demonstrates the ways in which the research areas identified by cataloging practitioners reflect design RQs-and therefore require design approaches and methods to answer them.
- Date
- 30. 5.2019 19:14:22
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 56(2018) no.8, S.683-701
