Search (59 results, page 1 of 3)

0.03165672 = product of:
  0.14245524 = sum of:
    0.054392375 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 1659) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.054392375 = score(doc=1659,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.14721331 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037353165 = queryNorm
        0.36948 = fieldWeight in 1659, 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=1659)
    0.08806286 = weight(_text_:germany in 1659) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08806286 = score(doc=1659,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22275731 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.963546 = idf(docFreq=308, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037353165 = queryNorm
        0.39533097 = fieldWeight in 1659, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.963546 = idf(docFreq=308, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1659)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

Principles of 11 subject heading languages from USA, Germany, Portugal, Iran, Canada, Norway, Spain, Poland, France, Russia

LCSH

Subject cataloging / Rules

Subject

Subject cataloging / Rules

0.027715685 = product of:
  0.12472058 = sum of:
    0.057769425 = weight(_text_:data in 863) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.057769425 = score(doc=863,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.118112594 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037353165 = queryNorm
        0.48910472 = fieldWeight in 863, 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=863)
    0.066951156 = weight(_text_:processing in 863) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.066951156 = score(doc=863,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.15121111 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037353165 = queryNorm
        0.4427661 = fieldWeight in 863, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=863)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

LCSH

Subject cataloguing / Data processing
Machine / readable bibliographic data

Subject

Subject cataloguing / Data processing
Machine / readable bibliographic data

0.022366492 = product of:
  0.067099474 = sum of:
    0.02063194 = weight(_text_:data in 2337) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02063194 = score(doc=2337,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.118112594 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037353165 = queryNorm
        0.17468026 = fieldWeight in 2337, 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=2337)
    0.03381544 = weight(_text_:processing in 2337) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03381544 = score(doc=2337,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15121111 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037353165 = queryNorm
        0.22363065 = fieldWeight in 2337, 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=2337)
    0.012652095 = product of:
      0.02530419 = sum of:
        0.02530419 = weight(_text_:22 in 2337) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02530419 = score(doc=2337,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13080442 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037353165 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2337, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2337)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(3/9)

Date

22. 9.1997 19:16:05

Source

Visualizing subject access for 21st century information resources: Papers presented at the 1997 Clinic on Library Applications of Data Processing, 2-4 Mar 1997, Graduate School of Library and Information Science, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Ed.: P.A. Cochrane et al

0.017589044 = product of:
  0.0791507 = sum of:
    0.054392375 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 2323) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.054392375 = score(doc=2323,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.14721331 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037353165 = queryNorm
        0.36948 = fieldWeight in 2323, 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=2323)
    0.024758326 = weight(_text_:data in 2323) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024758326 = score(doc=2323,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.118112594 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037353165 = queryNorm
        0.2096163 = fieldWeight in 2323, 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=2323)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

Partial coordination is a new method for cataloging documents for subject access. It is especially designed to enhance the precision of document searches in online environments. This article reports a preliminary evaluation of partial coordination that shows promising results compared with full-text retrieval. We also report the difficulties in empirically evaluating the effectiveness of automatic full-text retrieval in contrast to mixed methods such as partial coordination which combine human cataloging with computerized retrieval. Based on our study, we propose research in this area will substantially benefit from a common framework for failure analysis and a common data set. This will allow information retrieval researchers adapting 'library style'cataloging to large electronic document collections, as well as those developing automated or mixed methods, to directly compare their proposals for indexing and retrieval. This article concludes by suggesting guidelines for constructing such as testbed

0.01632773 = product of:
  0.07347478 = sum of:
    0.038461216 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 1165) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.038461216 = score(doc=1165,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14721331 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037353165 = queryNorm
        0.26126182 = fieldWeight in 1165, 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=1165)
    0.03501356 = weight(_text_:data in 1165) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03501356 = score(doc=1165,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.118112594 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037353165 = queryNorm
        0.29644224 = fieldWeight in 1165, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1165)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

University of Victoria Libraries has implemented faceted vocabularies, particularly FAST, in its digital collections platform (Vault). The process involved migrating a variety of standardized (pre-coordinated Library of Congress subject headings) and non-standardized metadata to conform to a URI-centric metadata application profile. The authors argue that faceted vocabularies and FAST have helped to create a robust and intuitive user navigation in the platform and allowed for an efficient and straightforward metadata creation process. Maintaining FAST as linked data within Vault has required putting in place some technical processes to keep URIs and textual labels up to date and solutions (FAST Updater) have been locally developed.

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 61(2023) no.5-6, S.535-557

0.014519301 = product of:
  0.06533685 = sum of:
    0.024758326 = weight(_text_:data in 386) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024758326 = score(doc=386,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.118112594 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037353165 = queryNorm
        0.2096163 = fieldWeight in 386, 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=386)
    0.040578526 = weight(_text_:processing in 386) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.040578526 = score(doc=386,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15121111 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037353165 = queryNorm
        0.26835677 = fieldWeight in 386, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=386)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

Using subject headings for Online Retrieval is an indispensable tool for online system desingners who are developing new systems or refining exicting ones. The book describes subject analysis and subject searching in online catalogs, including the limitations of retrieval, and demonstrates how such limitations can be overcome through system design and programming. The book describes the Library of Congress Subject headings system and system characteristics, shows how information is stored in machine readable files, and offers examples of and recommendations for successful methods. Tables are included to support these recommendations, and diagrams, graphs, and bar charts are used to provide results of data analyses.

Footnote

Rez. in: Information processing and management 31(1995) no.3, S.450-451 (R.R. Larson); Library resources and technical services 41(1997) no.1, S.60-67 (B.H. Weinberg)

0.014048787 = product of:
  0.06321954 = sum of:
    0.038461216 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 1150) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.038461216 = score(doc=1150,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14721331 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037353165 = queryNorm
        0.26126182 = fieldWeight in 1150, 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=1150)
    0.024758326 = weight(_text_:data in 1150) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024758326 = score(doc=1150,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.118112594 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037353165 = queryNorm
        0.2096163 = fieldWeight in 1150, 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=1150)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

This is an overview of the development of FAST (Faceted Application of Subject Terminology) from its inception in the late 1990s, through its development and implementation to the work being undertaken by OCLC and the FAST Policy and Outreach Committee (FPOC) to develop and promote FAST. FPOC members explain how FAST is used by institutions in Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States. They cover their experience of implementing FAST and the benefits they have derived. The final section considers the value of FAST as a faceted vocabulary and the potential for future development and linked data.

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 61(2023) no.5-6, S.506-524

0.013907635 = product of:
  0.062584355 = sum of:
    0.04487142 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 7238) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04487142 = score(doc=7238,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14721331 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037353165 = queryNorm
        0.30480546 = fieldWeight in 7238, 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=7238)
    0.017712934 = product of:
      0.035425868 = sum of:
        0.035425868 = weight(_text_:22 in 7238) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035425868 = score(doc=7238,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13080442 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037353165 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 7238, 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=7238)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Date

22. 4.1997 20:43:23

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 23(1996) no.2, S.5-16

0.011920829 = product of:
  0.05364373 = sum of:
    0.038461216 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 5920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.038461216 = score(doc=5920,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14721331 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037353165 = queryNorm
        0.26126182 = fieldWeight in 5920, 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=5920)
    0.015182514 = product of:
      0.030365027 = sum of:
        0.030365027 = weight(_text_:22 in 5920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030365027 = score(doc=5920,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13080442 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037353165 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 5920, 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=5920)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Date

27. 5.2001 16:22:21

Series

Cataloging and classification quarterly; vol.29, nos.1/2

0.011920829 = product of:
  0.05364373 = sum of:
    0.038461216 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 3837) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.038461216 = score(doc=3837,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14721331 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037353165 = queryNorm
        0.26126182 = fieldWeight in 3837, 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=3837)
    0.015182514 = product of:
      0.030365027 = sum of:
        0.030365027 = weight(_text_:22 in 3837) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030365027 = score(doc=3837,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13080442 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037353165 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3837, 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=3837)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

Library of Congress Subject Headings (LSCH), which celebrated its 100th birthday in 1998, is the largest cataloging and indexing language in the world for the indication of the topics and formats of books and similar publications. It consists of a controlled list of main headings, many with subdivisions, with a rich system of cross references. It is supported by the U.S. government, and undergoes systematic revision. In recent decades its managers have begun to confront challenges such as biased terminology, complicated syntax (how terms are put together to form headings), and effective displays in electronic media. Many suggestions have been made for its improvement, including moving to a fully faceted system.

Date

27. 8.2011 14:22:13

0.011834323 = product of:
  0.053254455 = sum of:
    0.0330111 = weight(_text_:data in 3734) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0330111 = score(doc=3734,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.118112594 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037353165 = queryNorm
        0.2794884 = fieldWeight in 3734, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3734)
    0.020243352 = product of:
      0.040486705 = sum of:
        0.040486705 = weight(_text_:22 in 3734) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040486705 = score(doc=3734,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13080442 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037353165 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3734, 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=3734)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

Most indexed databases now include their thesauri and/or coding in their bibliographic files, searchable at the databases' online connect rates. Assesses the searchability of these on the different hosts. Thesauri and classifications are also available as diskette or CD-ROM products. Describes a number of these, highlighting the diskette thesaurus from IFI/Plenum Data for its flexible databases, the CLAIMS Uniterm and Comprehensive indexes to US chemical patents

Source

Searcher. 3(1995) no.8, S.18-22

0.011707324 = product of:
  0.052682955 = sum of:
    0.032051016 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 5148) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.032051016 = score(doc=5148,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14721331 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037353165 = queryNorm
        0.21771818 = fieldWeight in 5148, 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=5148)
    0.02063194 = weight(_text_:data in 5148) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02063194 = score(doc=5148,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.118112594 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037353165 = queryNorm
        0.17468026 = fieldWeight in 5148, 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=5148)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

Documents in digital and paper libraries may be arranged, based on their topics, in order to facilitate browsing. It may seem intuitively obvious that ordering documents by their subject should improve browsing performance; the results presented in this article suggest that ordering library materials by their Gray code values and through using links consistent with the small world model of document relationships is consistent with improving browsing performance. Below, library circulation data, including ordering with Library of Congress Classification numbers and Library of Congress Subject Headings, are used to provide information useful in generating user-centered document arrangements, as well as user-independent arrangements. Documents may be linearly arranged so they can be placed in a line by topic, such as on a library shelf, or in a list on a computer display. Crossover links, jumps between a document and another document to which it is not adjacent, can be used in library databases to allow additional paths that one might take when browsing. The improvement that is obtained with different combinations of document orderings and different crossovers is examined and applications suggested.

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 55(2017) no.4, S.229-246

0.011395916 = product of:
  0.10256325 = sum of:
    0.10256325 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 119) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10256325 = score(doc=119,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14721331 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037353165 = queryNorm
        0.6966982 = fieldWeight in 119, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=119)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)

0.009971427 = product of:
  0.08974284 = sum of:
    0.08974284 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 1163) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08974284 = score(doc=1163,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.14721331 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037353165 = queryNorm
        0.6096109 = fieldWeight in 1163, 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=1163)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)

Abstract

This paper is the result of a request from Library of Congress leadership to assess pre-coordinated versus post-coordinated subject cataloging. It argues that the disadvantages of pre-coordinated subject strings are perennial and continue to hinder progress, while the advantages of post-coordinated subject cataloging have expanded, resulting in new opportunities to serve the needs of catalogers and end users alike. The consequences of retaining pre-coordinated headings will have long-term impacts that heavily out-weigh the short-term challenges of transitioning to new cataloging practices. By implementing post-coordinated, faceted vocabularies, the Library of Congress will be investing in the future of libraries.

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 61(2023) no.5-6, S.491-505

0.009110899 = product of:
  0.08199809 = sum of:
    0.08199809 = weight(_text_:processing in 1395) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08199809 = score(doc=1395,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.15121111 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037353165 = queryNorm
        0.54227555 = fieldWeight in 1395, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          4.048147 = idf(docFreq=2097, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1395)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)

Abstract

This article deals with the meaningful processing of information in relation to two systems of Information processing: pre-coordination and post-coordination. The different approaches are discussed, with emphasis an the need for a controlled vocabulary in information retrieval. Assigned indexing, which employs a controlled vocabulary, is described in detail. Types of indexing language can be divided into two broad groups - those using pre-coordinated terms and those depending an post-coordination. They represent two different basic approaches in processing and Information retrieval. The historical development of these two approaches is described, as well as the two tools that apply to these approaches: thesauri and subject headings.

0.008546937 = product of:
  0.07692243 = sum of:
    0.07692243 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 454) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07692243 = score(doc=454,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.14721331 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037353165 = queryNorm
        0.52252364 = fieldWeight in 454, 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=454)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 10(1989) nos.1/2, S.81-94

0.008546937 = product of:
  0.07692243 = sum of:
    0.07692243 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 791) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07692243 = score(doc=791,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.14721331 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037353165 = queryNorm
        0.52252364 = fieldWeight in 791, 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=791)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)

Abstract

The Subject Analysis Committee Subcommittee on FAST of the Association for Library Collections & Technical Services (ALCTS) was established in the fall of 2004 to explore issues related to the implementation of the Faceted Application of Subject Terminology (FAST) subject heading schema. FAST is being developed at the Online Computer Library Center (OCLC) and is derived from the Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH) with a simplified syntax. This paper is based on comments by the Subject Analysis Committee Subcommittee on FAST, which reviewed a sample of 5,000 bibliographic records with both LCSH and FAST headings. It provides the library community with some understanding of FAST, a new system of subject cataloging and metadata.

Footnote

Beitrag eines Themenheftes "The Intellectual and Professional World of Cataloging"

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 45(2008) no.3, S.91-110

0.007176465 = product of:
  0.06458818 = sum of:
    0.06458818 = weight(_text_:data in 2883) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06458818 = score(doc=2883,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.118112594 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037353165 = queryNorm
        0.5468357 = fieldWeight in 2883, 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=2883)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)

Abstract

Optimal retrieval in on-line searching can be achieved through combined use of both natural language and controlled vocabularies. However, there is a large variety of types of controlled vocabulary in data bases and often more than one in a single data base. Optimal use of these vocabularies requires understanding what types of languages are involved, and taking advantage of the particular mix of vocabularies in a given data base. Examples 4 major types of indexing and classification used in data bases and puts these 4 in the context of 3 other approaches to subject access. Discusses how to evaluate a new data base for various forms of subject access.

0.007176465 = product of:
  0.06458818 = sum of:
    0.06458818 = weight(_text_:data in 207) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06458818 = score(doc=207,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.118112594 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1620505 = idf(docFreq=5088, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037353165 = queryNorm
        0.5468357 = fieldWeight in 207, 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=207)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)

Abstract

Optimal retrieval in on-line searching can be achieved through combined use of both natural language and controlled vocabularies. However, there is a large variety of types of controlled vocabulary in data bases and often more than one in a single data base. Optimal use of these vocabularies requires understanding what types of languages are involved, and taking advantage of the particular mix of vocabularies in a given data base. Examples 4 major types of indexing and classification used in data bases and puts these 4 in the context of 3 other approaches to subject access. Discusses how to evaluate a new data base for various forms of subject access.

0.007122448 = product of:
  0.06410203 = sum of:
    0.06410203 = weight(_text_:cataloging in 2011) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06410203 = score(doc=2011,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.14721331 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037353165 = queryNorm
        0.43543637 = fieldWeight in 2011, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.9411201 = idf(docFreq=2334, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2011)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)

Abstract

Over the past ten years, various organizations, both public and private, have expressed interest in implementing FAST in their cataloging workflows. As interest in FAST has grown, so too has interest in knowing how FAST is being used and by whom. Since 2002 eighteen institutions (see table 1) in six countries have expressed interest in learning more about FAST and how it could be implemented in cataloging workflows. Currently OCLC is aware of nine agencies that have actually adopted or support FAST for resource description. This study, the first systematic census of FAST users undertaken by OCLC, was conducted, in part, to address these inquiries. Its purpose was to examine: how FAST is being utilized; why FAST was chosen as the cataloging vocabulary; what benefits FAST provides; and what can be done to enhance the value of FAST. Interview requests were sent to all parties that had previously contacted OCLC about FAST. Of the eighteen organizations contacted, sixteen agreed to provide information about their decision whether to use FAST (nine adopters, seven non-adopters).

Footnote

Rez. in: Cataloging and classification quarterly 53(2015) no.2, S.247-249 (Shelby E. Harken)