-
Byrum, J.D.: ¬The emerging global bibliographical network : the era of international standardization in the development of cataloging policy (2000)
0.07
0.06602751 = product of:
0.11884951 = sum of:
0.030305803 = product of:
0.060611606 = sum of:
0.060611606 = weight(_text_:headings in 190) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.060611606 = score(doc=190,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15996648 = queryWeight, product of:
4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.3789019 = fieldWeight in 190, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=190)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.02181897 = weight(_text_:library in 190) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02181897 = score(doc=190,freq=6.0), product of:
0.08672522 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.25158736 = fieldWeight in 190, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=190)
0.014089839 = weight(_text_:of in 190) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014089839 = score(doc=190,freq=20.0), product of:
0.05157766 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.27317715 = fieldWeight in 190, product of:
4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
20.0 = termFreq=20.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=190)
0.041462988 = weight(_text_:congress in 190) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.041462988 = score(doc=190,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15733992 = queryWeight, product of:
4.7703104 = idf(docFreq=1018, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.26352492 = fieldWeight in 190, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.7703104 = idf(docFreq=1018, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=190)
0.011171908 = product of:
0.022343816 = sum of:
0.022343816 = weight(_text_:22 in 190) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.022343816 = score(doc=190,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11550141 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 190, 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=190)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.5555556 = coord(5/9)
- Abstract
- Catalogers have become interdependent in their pursuit to provide bibliographic control and access. This interdependency has brought with it the need for greater agreement in applying common cataloging policies and rules. The expanded application of AACR2 (Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules) is fostering greater uniformity in the provision of bibliographic description and access. The rules have been translated into numerous languages and used in European, Middle Eastern, and Latin American countries. Cataloging committees and individual libraries in Europe and South Africa have expressed strong interest in adopting, adapting, or aligning with AACR2. PCC (Program for Cooperative Cataloguing) is one of the most successful cooperative cataloging efforts and has a considerable international component, which encourages the use of AACR, LCSH (Library of Congress Subject Headings), and MARC. AACR2 is successful on an international level because it is based in internationally developed standards, including ISBDs and the Paris Principles. ISBDs (International Standard Bibliographic Description) and the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records are examples of the contributions that IFLA (International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions) has made to the internationalization of cataloging. IFLA sponsored the international conference that resulted in the Paris Principles as well as subsequent projects to craft international policy in relation to uniform headings for persons, corporate bodies, and titles.
- Date
- 10. 9.2000 17:38:22
- Source
- Library resources and technical services. 44(2000) no.3, S.114-121
-
Mann, T.: ¬The changing nature of the catalog and its integration with other discovery tools. Final report. March 17, 2006. Prepared for the Library of Congress by Karen Calhoun : A critical review (2006)
0.06
0.06062631 = product of:
0.1364092 = sum of:
0.025715325 = product of:
0.05143065 = sum of:
0.05143065 = weight(_text_:headings in 5012) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05143065 = score(doc=5012,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15996648 = queryWeight, product of:
4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.3215089 = fieldWeight in 5012, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5012)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.026182763 = weight(_text_:library in 5012) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.026182763 = score(doc=5012,freq=6.0), product of:
0.08672522 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.30190483 = fieldWeight in 5012, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5012)
0.014146087 = weight(_text_:of in 5012) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014146087 = score(doc=5012,freq=14.0), product of:
0.05157766 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.2742677 = fieldWeight in 5012, product of:
3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
14.0 = termFreq=14.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5012)
0.07036502 = weight(_text_:congress in 5012) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07036502 = score(doc=5012,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15733992 = queryWeight, product of:
4.7703104 = idf(docFreq=1018, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.4472166 = fieldWeight in 5012, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.7703104 = idf(docFreq=1018, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5012)
0.44444445 = coord(4/9)
- Abstract
- According to the Calhoun report, library operations that are not digital, that do not result in resources that are remotely accessible, that involve professional human judgement or expertise, or that require conceptual categorization and standardization rather than relevance ranking of keywords, do not fit into its proposed "leadership" strategy. This strategy itself, however, is based on an inappropriate business model - and a misrepresentation of that business model to begin with. The Calhoun report draws unjustified conclusions about the digital age, inflates wishful thinking, fails to make critical distinctions, and disregards (as well as mischaracterizes) an alternative "niche" strategy for research libraries, to promote scholarship (rather than increase "market position"). Its recommendations to eliminate Library of Congress Subject Headings, and to use "fast turnaround" time as the "gold standard" in cataloging, are particularly unjustified, and would have serious negative consequences for the capacity of research libraries to promote scholarly research.
- Content
- Stellungnahme zu: Calhoun, K.: The changing nature of the catalog and its integration with other discovery tools.
-
Broadbent, E.: ¬The online catalog : dictionary, classified, or both? (1989)
0.05
0.050815955 = product of:
0.114335895 = sum of:
0.036366962 = product of:
0.072733924 = sum of:
0.072733924 = weight(_text_:headings in 457) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.072733924 = score(doc=457,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15996648 = queryWeight, product of:
4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.45468226 = fieldWeight in 457, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=457)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.015116624 = weight(_text_:library in 457) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015116624 = score(doc=457,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08672522 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.17430481 = fieldWeight in 457, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=457)
0.01309673 = weight(_text_:of in 457) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01309673 = score(doc=457,freq=12.0), product of:
0.05157766 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.25392252 = fieldWeight in 457, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=457)
0.049755584 = weight(_text_:congress in 457) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049755584 = score(doc=457,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15733992 = queryWeight, product of:
4.7703104 = idf(docFreq=1018, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.31622988 = fieldWeight in 457, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.7703104 = idf(docFreq=1018, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=457)
0.44444445 = coord(4/9)
- Abstract
- The main purpose of the study was to determine if the online catalog can function both as a dictionary and classified catalog without requiring additional time or intellectual effort on the part of the cataloger. A total of 1842 MARC bibliographic records listed in the 370-379 classified section of American Book Publishing Record were studied. These records displayed 2735 subject headings. Of these, 1491 (55%) had a Library of Congress classification number linked to them. An alphabetical and classified index was created using primary subjects and their related classification numbers. While such an index could be a useful browsing device if integrated into an online catalog, creating a bona fide classified catalog would require assigning classification numbers to the secondary subject headings.
-
Howard, J.H.: ¬The Library of Congress Union Catalog experience (1982)
0.05
0.050377097 = product of:
0.15113129 = sum of:
0.030233247 = weight(_text_:library in 288) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030233247 = score(doc=288,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08672522 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.34860963 = fieldWeight in 288, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=288)
0.021386873 = weight(_text_:of in 288) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021386873 = score(doc=288,freq=8.0), product of:
0.05157766 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.41465378 = fieldWeight in 288, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=288)
0.09951117 = weight(_text_:congress in 288) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09951117 = score(doc=288,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15733992 = queryWeight, product of:
4.7703104 = idf(docFreq=1018, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.63245976 = fieldWeight in 288, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.7703104 = idf(docFreq=1018, maxDocs=44218)
0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=288)
0.33333334 = coord(3/9)
- Footnote
- Simultaneously published as The Future of the Union Catalogue: Proceedings of the International Symposium on the Future of the Union Catalogue
-
Pirmann, C.: Tags in the catalogue : insights from a usability study of LibraryThing for libraries (2012)
0.05
0.04541184 = product of:
0.10217664 = sum of:
0.021429438 = product of:
0.042858876 = sum of:
0.042858876 = weight(_text_:headings in 5570) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042858876 = score(doc=5570,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15996648 = queryWeight, product of:
4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.2679241 = fieldWeight in 5570, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5570)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.025194373 = weight(_text_:library in 5570) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025194373 = score(doc=5570,freq=8.0), product of:
0.08672522 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.29050803 = fieldWeight in 5570, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5570)
0.014089839 = weight(_text_:of in 5570) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014089839 = score(doc=5570,freq=20.0), product of:
0.05157766 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.27317715 = fieldWeight in 5570, product of:
4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
20.0 = termFreq=20.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5570)
0.041462988 = weight(_text_:congress in 5570) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.041462988 = score(doc=5570,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15733992 = queryWeight, product of:
4.7703104 = idf(docFreq=1018, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.26352492 = fieldWeight in 5570, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.7703104 = idf(docFreq=1018, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5570)
0.44444445 = coord(4/9)
- Abstract
- Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH), the standard subject language used in library catalogues, are often criticized for their lack of currency, biased language, and atypical syndetic structure. Conversely, folksonomies (or tags), which rely on the natural language of their users, offer a flexibility often lacking in controlled vocabularies and may offer a means of augmenting more rigid controlled vocabularies such as LCSH. Content analysis studies have demonstrated the potential for folksonomies to be used as a means of enhancing subject access to materials, and libraries are beginning to integrate tagging systems into their catalogues. This study examines the utility of tags as a means of enhancing subject access to materials in library online public access catalogues (OPACs) through usability testing with the LibraryThing for Libraries catalogue enhancements. Findings indicate that while they cannot replace LCSH, tags do show promise for aiding information seeking in OPACs. In the context of information systems design, the study revealed that while folksonomies have the potential to enhance subject access to materials, that potential is severely limited by the current inability of catalogue interfaces to support tag-based searches alongside standard catalogue searches.
- Source
- Library trends. 61(2012) no.1, S.234-247
-
Julien, C.-A.; Guastavino, C.; Bouthillier, F.: Capitalizing on information organization and information visualization for a new-generation catalogue (2012)
0.04
0.04325055 = product of:
0.09731373 = sum of:
0.021429438 = product of:
0.042858876 = sum of:
0.042858876 = weight(_text_:headings in 5567) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042858876 = score(doc=5567,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15996648 = queryWeight, product of:
4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.2679241 = fieldWeight in 5567, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5567)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.02181897 = weight(_text_:library in 5567) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02181897 = score(doc=5567,freq=6.0), product of:
0.08672522 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.25158736 = fieldWeight in 5567, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5567)
0.012602335 = weight(_text_:of in 5567) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012602335 = score(doc=5567,freq=16.0), product of:
0.05157766 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.24433708 = fieldWeight in 5567, product of:
4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
16.0 = termFreq=16.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5567)
0.041462988 = weight(_text_:congress in 5567) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.041462988 = score(doc=5567,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15733992 = queryWeight, product of:
4.7703104 = idf(docFreq=1018, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.26352492 = fieldWeight in 5567, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.7703104 = idf(docFreq=1018, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5567)
0.44444445 = coord(4/9)
- Abstract
- Subject searching is difficult with traditional text-based online public access library catalogues (OPACs), and the next-generation discovery layers are keyword searching and result filtering tools that offer little support for subject browsing. Next-generation OPACs ignore the rich network of relations offered by controlled subject vocabulary, which can facilitate subject browsing. A new generation of OPACs could leverage existing information-organization investments and offer online searchers a novel browsing and searching environment. This is a case study of the design and development of a virtual reality subject browsing and information retrieval tool. The functional prototype shows that the Library of Congress subject headings (LCSH) can be shaped into a useful and usable tree structure serving as a visual metaphor that contains a real world collection from the domain of science and engineering. Formative tests show that users can effectively browse the LCSH tree and carve it up based on their keyword search queries. This study uses a complex information-organization structure as a defining characteristic of an OPAC that goes beyond the standard keyword search model, toward the cutting edge of online search tools.
- Source
- Library trends. 61(2012) no.1, S.149-161
-
Marcum, D.B.: ¬The future of cataloging (2005)
0.04
0.04063329 = product of:
0.12189987 = sum of:
0.033801798 = weight(_text_:library in 1086) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.033801798 = score(doc=1086,freq=10.0), product of:
0.08672522 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.38975742 = fieldWeight in 1086, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1086)
0.017733058 = weight(_text_:of in 1086) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017733058 = score(doc=1086,freq=22.0), product of:
0.05157766 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.34381276 = fieldWeight in 1086, product of:
4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
22.0 = termFreq=22.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1086)
0.07036502 = weight(_text_:congress in 1086) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07036502 = score(doc=1086,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15733992 = queryWeight, product of:
4.7703104 = idf(docFreq=1018, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.4472166 = fieldWeight in 1086, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.7703104 = idf(docFreq=1018, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1086)
0.33333334 = coord(3/9)
- Abstract
- This thought piece on the future of cataloging is long on musings and short on predictions. But that isn't to denigrate it, only to clarify it's role given the possible connotations of the title. Rather than coming up with solutions or predictions, Marcum ponders the proper role of cataloging in a Google age. Marcum cites the Google project to digitize much or all of the contents of a selected set of major research libraries as evidence that the world of cataloging is changing dramatically, and she briefly identifies ways in which the Library of Congress is responding to this new environment. But, Marcum cautions, "the future of cataloging is not something that the Library of Congress, or even the small library group with which we will meet, can or expects to resolve alone." She then poses some specific questions that should be considered, including how we can massively change our current MARC/AACR2 system without creating chaos
- Content
- Vgl. auch: Library resources and technical services. 50(2006) no.1, S.xx-xx.
- Source
- http://www.loc.gov/library/reports/CatalogingSpeech.pdf
-
Markey, K.: ¬The online library catalog : paradise lost and paradise regained? (2007)
0.04
0.03994595 = product of:
0.08987838 = sum of:
0.015000606 = product of:
0.030001212 = sum of:
0.030001212 = weight(_text_:headings in 1172) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030001212 = score(doc=1172,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15996648 = queryWeight, product of:
4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.18754686 = fieldWeight in 1172, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1172)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.03299405 = weight(_text_:library in 1172) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03299405 = score(doc=1172,freq=28.0), product of:
0.08672522 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.38044354 = fieldWeight in 1172, product of:
5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
28.0 = termFreq=28.0
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1172)
0.012859631 = weight(_text_:of in 1172) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012859631 = score(doc=1172,freq=34.0), product of:
0.05157766 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.2493256 = fieldWeight in 1172, product of:
5.8309517 = tf(freq=34.0), with freq of:
34.0 = termFreq=34.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1172)
0.02902409 = weight(_text_:congress in 1172) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02902409 = score(doc=1172,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15733992 = queryWeight, product of:
4.7703104 = idf(docFreq=1018, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.18446743 = fieldWeight in 1172, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.7703104 = idf(docFreq=1018, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1172)
0.44444445 = coord(4/9)
- Abstract
- This think piece tells why the online library catalog fell from grace and why new directions pertaining to cataloging simplification and primary sources will not attract people back to the online catalog. It proposes an alternative direction that has greater likelihood of regaining the online catalog's lofty status and longtime users. Such a direction will require paradigm shifts in library cataloging and in the design and development of online library catalogs that heed catalog users' longtime demands for improvements to the searching experience. Our failure to respond accordingly may permanently exile scholarly and scientific information to a netherworld where no one searches while less reliable, accurate, and objective sources of information thrive in a paradise where people prefer to search for information.
The impetus for this essay is the library community's uncertainty regarding the present and future direction of the library catalog in the era of Google and mass digitization projects. The uncertainty is evident at the highest levels. Deanna Marcum, Associate Librarian for Library Services at the Library of Congress (LC), is struck by undergraduate students who favor digital resources over the online library catalog because such resources are available at anytime and from anywhere (Marcum, 2006). She suggests that "the detailed attention that we have been paying to descriptive cataloging may no longer be justified ... retooled catalogers could give more time to authority control, subject analysis, [and] resource identification and evaluation" (Marcum, 2006, 8). In an abrupt about-face, LC terminated series added entries in cataloging records, one of the few subject-rich fields in such records (Cataloging Policy and Support Office, 2006). Mann (2006b) and Schniderman (2006) cite evidence of LC's prevailing viewpoint in favor of simplifying cataloging at the expense of subject cataloging. LC commissioned Karen Calhoun (2006) to prepare a report on "revitalizing" the online library catalog. Calhoun's directive is clear: divert resources from cataloging mass-produced formats (e.g., books) to cataloging the unique primary sources (e.g., archives, special collections, teaching objects, research by-products). She sums up her rationale for such a directive, "The existing local catalog's market position has eroded to the point where there is real concern for its ability to weather the competition for information seekers' attention" (p. 10). At the University of California Libraries (2005), a task force's recommendations parallel those in Calhoun report especially regarding the elimination of subject headings in favor of automatically generated metadata. Contemplating these events prompted me to revisit the glorious past of the online library catalog. For a decade and a half beginning in the early 1980s, the online library catalog was the jewel in the crown when people eagerly queued at its terminals to find information written by the world's experts. I despair how eagerly people now embrace Google because of the suspect provenance of the information Google retrieves. Long ago, we could have added more value to the online library catalog but the only thing we changed was the catalog's medium. Our failure to act back then cost the online catalog the crown. Now that the era of mass digitization has begun, we have a second chance at redesigning the online library catalog, getting it right, coaxing back old users, and attracting new ones. Let's revisit the past, reconsidering missed opportunities, reassessing their merits, combining them with new directions, making bold decisions and acting decisively on them.
-
Managing cataloging and the organization of information : philosophies, practices and challenges at the onset of the 21st century (2000)
0.04
0.037977338 = product of:
0.08544901 = sum of:
0.019717716 = weight(_text_:library in 238) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.019717716 = score(doc=238,freq=10.0), product of:
0.08672522 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.22735849 = fieldWeight in 238, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=238)
0.007639759 = weight(_text_:of in 238) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.007639759 = score(doc=238,freq=12.0), product of:
0.05157766 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.14812148 = fieldWeight in 238, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=238)
0.050271202 = weight(_text_:congress in 238) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.050271202 = score(doc=238,freq=6.0), product of:
0.15733992 = queryWeight, product of:
4.7703104 = idf(docFreq=1018, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.31950697 = fieldWeight in 238, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
4.7703104 = idf(docFreq=1018, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=238)
0.007820335 = product of:
0.01564067 = sum of:
0.01564067 = weight(_text_:22 in 238) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01564067 = score(doc=238,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11550141 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 238, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=238)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.44444445 = coord(4/9)
- Footnote
- Rez. in ZfBB 51(2004) H.1, S.54-55 (G. Pflug): "Unter dem wachsenden Einfluss der Informationstechnologie auf den Bibliotheksbereich nimmt die Katalogisierung eine Schlüsselstellung ein. Das vorliegende Werk gliedert sich in zwei Teile. Der erste Abschnitt ist mit »National Libraries« überschrieben, befasst sich jedoch nur mit der Library of Congress und der National Library of Canada. Ihm folgen Artikel über »Libraries around the world«. Dabei fälltjedoch auf, dass diese Studien zwar Bibliotheken in Großbritannien, Australien, Mittel- und Südamerika und selbst Afrika (Botswana) behandeln, nicht jedoch aus Kontinentaleuropa, trotz entsprechender Aktivitäten etwa in den Niederlanden, in Frankreich oder den deutschsprachigen Ländern. Nur DOBIS/LIBIS wird erwähnt, aber nur, weil es für kurze Zeit die kanadische Entwicklung beeinflusst hat. Im zweiten Teil kommen Katalogisierungsfachleute aus vier Spezial- und neun akademischen Bibliotheken - ausschließlich aus Nordamerika und Großbritannien - zu Wort. So enthält das Werk in 22 Beispielen Berichte über individuelle und regionale Lösungen. Dabei steht die Frage im Vordergrund, zu welchen Änderungen in der Katalogisierungs- und Sacherschließungspraxis die neuen elektronischen Techniken geführt haben. So streben z.B. die englischen Hochschulbibliotheken ein koordiniertes System an. Mit dem Übergang der British Library zu MARC 21 wird das Katalogsystem in Großbritannien nachhaltig beeinflusst - um nur zwei nahe liegende Beispiele zu nennen. Insgesamt werden drei Aspekte behandelt, die Automatisierungstechnik; die dabei einzusetzende Kooperation und das Outsourcing - nicht nur durch Übernahme von Daten anderer Bibliotheken oder durch Verbundsysteme, vor allem der Library of Congress, sondern auch durch Buchhandelsfirmen wie Blackwell North America Authority Control Service. In der Frage der Sacherschließung befassen sich die Beiträge mit den im amerikanischen Bereich üblichen Klassifikationssystemen, vor allem der Colon Classification, Dewey in seinen beiden Formen oder der Library of Congress Classification. Für die deutsche Diskussion sind diese Aspekte vor allem wegen des Übergangs der Deutschen Bibliothek in ihrer Nationalbibliografie zur DDC von großem Interesse (vgl. Magda Heiner-Freiling: Die DDC in der Deutschen Nationalbibliografie. In Dialog mit Bibliotheken. 15. 2003, Nr. 3, S. 8-13). Doch stellen auch die unterschiedlichen Überlegungen zur alphabetischen Katalogisierung, verbunden mit den da zugehörigen Datenbanken, einen interessanten Beitrag zur augenblicklichen Diskussion in Deutschland dar, da auch hier seit einigen Jahren die Katalogisierung nach RAK und ihre Ablösung eine lebhafte Diskussion ausgelöst hat, wie unter anderem der zusammenfassende Beitrag von Elisabeth Niggemann in: Dialog mit Bibliotheken (15. 2003, Nr. 2, S. 4-8) zeigt. Auch die angloamerikanischen und die mit ihnen zum Beispiel in Mexiko, Südamerika oder Australien verbundenen Bibliotheken - das zeigt das Buch deutlich - diskutieren die Frage der alphabetischen Katalogisierung kontrovers. So werden z.B. neben den dominanten AACR-Regeln mit ihrer Weiterentwicklung mehr als zehn andere Katalogisierungssysteme und rund 20 Online-Datenbanken behandelt. Damit liefert das Buch für die Diskussion in Deutschland und die anstehenden Entscheidungen in seiner Grundtendenz wie in den unterschiedlichen-auch widersprüchlichen-Aspekten dereinzelnen Beiträge wertvolle Anregungen."
-
Visintin, G.: Passaggi (1998)
0.04
0.036622006 = product of:
0.08239952 = sum of:
0.0342871 = product of:
0.0685742 = sum of:
0.0685742 = weight(_text_:headings in 3053) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0685742 = score(doc=3053,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15996648 = queryWeight, product of:
4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.42867854 = fieldWeight in 3053, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3053)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.020155499 = weight(_text_:library in 3053) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020155499 = score(doc=3053,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08672522 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.23240642 = fieldWeight in 3053, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3053)
0.010081868 = weight(_text_:of in 3053) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.010081868 = score(doc=3053,freq=4.0), product of:
0.05157766 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.19546966 = fieldWeight in 3053, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3053)
0.017875053 = product of:
0.035750106 = sum of:
0.035750106 = weight(_text_:22 in 3053) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035750106 = score(doc=3053,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11550141 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3053, 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=3053)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.44444445 = coord(4/9)
- Abstract
- Examines in detail the author cataloguing practices adopted by the Italian National Library Service, as set out in its 1995 Cataloguing Guide (Guida SBN), and discusses how far these practices accord with the standard 1979 RICA author cataloguing rules. Since the author headings prescribed by RICA include personal names, corporate names and titles, this survey looks at all such SBN catalogue entries having an access point function. Presents many examples of standard and variant forms of heading, and reviews control procedures
- Date
- 22. 2.1999 20:40:57
-
Arsenault, C.; Ménard, E.: Searching titles with initial articles in library catalogs : a case study and search behavior analysis (2007)
0.04
0.0358543 = product of:
0.080672175 = sum of:
0.030233247 = weight(_text_:library in 2264) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030233247 = score(doc=2264,freq=8.0), product of:
0.08672522 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.34860963 = fieldWeight in 2264, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2264)
0.0106934365 = weight(_text_:of in 2264) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0106934365 = score(doc=2264,freq=8.0), product of:
0.05157766 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.20732689 = fieldWeight in 2264, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2264)
0.026339196 = product of:
0.05267839 = sum of:
0.05267839 = weight(_text_:problems in 2264) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05267839 = score(doc=2264,freq=4.0), product of:
0.13613719 = queryWeight, product of:
4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.3869508 = fieldWeight in 2264, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.1274753 = idf(docFreq=1937, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2264)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.013406289 = product of:
0.026812578 = sum of:
0.026812578 = weight(_text_:22 in 2264) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.026812578 = score(doc=2264,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11550141 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2264, 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=2264)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.44444445 = coord(4/9)
- Abstract
- This study examines problems caused by initial articles in library catalogs. The problematic records observed are those whose titles begin with a word erroneously considered to be an article at the retrieval stage. Many retrieval algorithms edit queries by removing initial words corresponding to articles found in an exclusion list even whether the initial word is an article or not. Consequently, a certain number of documents remain more difficult to find. The study also examines user behavior during known-item retrieval using the title index in library catalogs, concentrating on the problems caused by the presence of an initial article or of a word homograph to an article. Measures of success and effectiveness are taken to determine if retrieval is affected in such cases.
- Date
- 10. 9.2000 17:38:22
- Source
- Library resources and technical services. 51(2007) no.3, S.190-203
-
Frias, J.A.: ¬La estructura conceptual del registro bibliografico : una revision (1996)
0.03
0.034559302 = product of:
0.103677906 = sum of:
0.024941156 = weight(_text_:library in 4618) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024941156 = score(doc=4618,freq=4.0), product of:
0.08672522 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.28758827 = fieldWeight in 4618, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4618)
0.020688567 = weight(_text_:of in 4618) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020688567 = score(doc=4618,freq=22.0), product of:
0.05157766 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.40111488 = fieldWeight in 4618, product of:
4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
22.0 = termFreq=22.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4618)
0.05804818 = weight(_text_:congress in 4618) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05804818 = score(doc=4618,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15733992 = queryWeight, product of:
4.7703104 = idf(docFreq=1018, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.36893487 = fieldWeight in 4618, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.7703104 = idf(docFreq=1018, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4618)
0.33333334 = coord(3/9)
- Abstract
- It is assumed that the conceptual structure of bibliographic records is based on the knowledge of user needs. In applying the entity-relationship model to the library catalogue the authority file and bibliographic records can be viewed as attributes, and the links between records and elements as relationships. Outlines the bibliographic relationships of the UNIMARC format, the analysis of hierarchical relationships carried out by Goosens and Mazur-Rzesos, and the typology of bibliographic documents established by McCallum. Presents 7 types of relationships developed by Tillet and gives results of an empirical study carried out to establish the extent and features of bibliographic relationships in the computerized catalogue of the Library of Congress
- Footnote
- Übers. des Titels: The conceptual structure of the bibliographic record
-
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
0.033584733 = product of:
0.100754194 = sum of:
0.020155499 = weight(_text_:library in 2278) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020155499 = score(doc=2278,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08672522 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.23240642 = fieldWeight in 2278, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2278)
0.014257914 = weight(_text_:of in 2278) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014257914 = score(doc=2278,freq=8.0), product of:
0.05157766 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.27643585 = fieldWeight in 2278, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2278)
0.06634078 = weight(_text_:congress in 2278) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06634078 = score(doc=2278,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15733992 = queryWeight, product of:
4.7703104 = idf(docFreq=1018, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.42163986 = fieldWeight in 2278, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.7703104 = idf(docFreq=1018, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2278)
0.33333334 = coord(3/9)
- 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.
-
Anderson, J.D.: Catalog file display principles and the new filing rules (1981)
0.03
0.032298878 = product of:
0.09689663 = sum of:
0.030233247 = weight(_text_:library in 278) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030233247 = score(doc=278,freq=8.0), product of:
0.08672522 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.34860963 = fieldWeight in 278, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=278)
0.016907806 = weight(_text_:of in 278) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016907806 = score(doc=278,freq=20.0), product of:
0.05157766 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.32781258 = fieldWeight in 278, product of:
4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
20.0 = termFreq=20.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=278)
0.049755584 = weight(_text_:congress in 278) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.049755584 = score(doc=278,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15733992 = queryWeight, product of:
4.7703104 = idf(docFreq=1018, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.31622988 = fieldWeight in 278, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.7703104 = idf(docFreq=1018, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=278)
0.33333334 = coord(3/9)
- Abstract
- File display-the way in which catalog records are arranged for display-is a principal determinant of access to printed library catalogs, whether they be on cards, on microform, or in book form. In 1980, both the American Library Association and the Library of Congress published new sets of filing rules which represent significant departures from traditional library catalog arrangement in North America. These new rules are analyzed and compared with each other and with their predecessors, the 1956 LC and the 1968 ALA filing rules, on the basis of fundamental attributes of files and filing: (1) the symbols considered in arranging records together with the filing values assigned to them, and (2) the underlying basis of filing-symbols or concepts. Numerous examples of the very different sequences which result in the application of these codes are provided and discussed. The purpose of this paper is to help clarify filing options and thereby to help librarians make more informed choices for the display of their own catalog files.
-
Hafter, R.: ¬The performance of card catalogs : a review of research (1979)
0.03
0.032074947 = product of:
0.09622484 = sum of:
0.040310998 = weight(_text_:library in 3069) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.040310998 = score(doc=3069,freq=2.0), product of:
0.08672522 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.46481284 = fieldWeight in 3069, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=3069)
0.020163735 = weight(_text_:of in 3069) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020163735 = score(doc=3069,freq=4.0), product of:
0.05157766 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.39093933 = fieldWeight in 3069, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=3069)
0.035750106 = product of:
0.07150021 = sum of:
0.07150021 = weight(_text_:22 in 3069) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07150021 = score(doc=3069,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11550141 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 3069, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=3069)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.33333334 = coord(3/9)
- Date
- 3.10.2000 20:48:22
- Source
- Library research. 1(1979), S.199-222
-
Calhoun, K.: ¬The changing nature of the catalog and its integration with other discovery tools : Prepared for the Library of Congress (2006)
0.03
0.031530682 = product of:
0.09459204 = sum of:
0.033424113 = weight(_text_:library in 5013) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.033424113 = score(doc=5013,freq=22.0), product of:
0.08672522 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.38540247 = fieldWeight in 5013, product of:
4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
22.0 = termFreq=22.0
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5013)
0.014257914 = weight(_text_:of in 5013) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.014257914 = score(doc=5013,freq=32.0), product of:
0.05157766 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.27643585 = fieldWeight in 5013, product of:
5.656854 = tf(freq=32.0), with freq of:
32.0 = termFreq=32.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5013)
0.046910014 = weight(_text_:congress in 5013) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.046910014 = score(doc=5013,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15733992 = queryWeight, product of:
4.7703104 = idf(docFreq=1018, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.2981444 = fieldWeight in 5013, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.7703104 = idf(docFreq=1018, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5013)
0.33333334 = coord(3/9)
- Abstract
- The destabilizing influences of the Web, widespread ownership of personal computers, and rising computer literacy have created an era of discontinuous change in research libraries a time when the cumulated assets of the past do not guarantee future success. The library catalog is such an asset. Today, a large and growing number of students and scholars routinely bypass library catalogs in favor of other discovery tools, and the catalog represents a shrinking proportion of the universe of scholarly information. The catalog is in decline, its processes and structures are unsustainable, and change needs to be swift. At the same time, books and serials are not dead, and they are not yet digital. Notwithstanding widespread expansion of digitization projects, ubiquitous e-journals, and a market that seems poised to move to e-books, the role of catalog records in discovery and retrieval of the world's library collections seems likely to continue for at least a couple of decades and probably longer. This report, commissioned by the Library of Congress (LC), offers an analysis of the current situation, options for revitalizing research library catalogs, a feasibility assessment, a vision for change, and a blueprint for action. Library decision makers are the primary audience for this report, whose aim is to elicit support, dialogue, collaboration, and movement toward solutions. Readers from the business community, particularly those that directly serve libraries, may find the report helpful for defining research and development efforts. The same is true for readers from membership organizations such as OCLC Online Computer Library Center, the Research Libraries Group, the Association for Research Libraries, the Council on Library and Information Resources, the Coalition for Networked Information, and the Digital Library Federation. Library managers and practitioners from all functional groups are likely to take an interest in the interview findings and in specific actions laid out in the blueprint.
-
Report on the future of bibliographic control : draft for public comment (2007)
0.03
0.03144268 = product of:
0.09432803 = sum of:
0.025068086 = weight(_text_:library in 1271) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.025068086 = score(doc=1271,freq=22.0), product of:
0.08672522 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.28905186 = fieldWeight in 1271, product of:
4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
22.0 = termFreq=22.0
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1271)
0.01363151 = weight(_text_:of in 1271) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01363151 = score(doc=1271,freq=52.0), product of:
0.05157766 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.26429096 = fieldWeight in 1271, product of:
7.2111025 = tf(freq=52.0), with freq of:
52.0 = termFreq=52.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1271)
0.055628434 = weight(_text_:congress in 1271) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.055628434 = score(doc=1271,freq=10.0), product of:
0.15733992 = queryWeight, product of:
4.7703104 = idf(docFreq=1018, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.35355577 = fieldWeight in 1271, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
4.7703104 = idf(docFreq=1018, maxDocs=44218)
0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1271)
0.33333334 = coord(3/9)
- Abstract
- The future of bibliographic control will be collaborative, decentralized, international in scope, and Web-based. Its realization will occur in cooperation with the private sector, and with the active collaboration of library users. Data will be gathered from multiple sources; change will happen quickly; and bibliographic control will be dynamic, not static. The underlying technology that makes this future possible and necessary-the World Wide Web-is now almost two decades old. Libraries must continue the transition to this future without delay in order to retain their relevance as information providers. The Working Group on the Future of Bibliographic Control encourages the library community to take a thoughtful and coordinated approach to effecting significant changes in bibliographic control. Such an approach will call for leadership that is neither unitary nor centralized. Nor will the responsibility to provide such leadership fall solely to the Library of Congress (LC). That said, the Working Group recognizes that LC plays a unique role in the library community of the United States, and the directions that LC takes have great impact on all libraries. We also recognize that there are many other institutions and organizations that have the expertise and the capacity to play significant roles in the bibliographic future. Wherever possible, those institutions must step forward and take responsibility for assisting with navigating the transition and for playing appropriate ongoing roles after that transition is complete. To achieve the goals set out in this document, we must look beyond individual libraries to a system wide deployment of resources. We must realize efficiencies in order to be able to reallocate resources from certain lower-value components of the bibliographic control ecosystem into other higher-value components of that same ecosystem. The recommendations in this report are directed at a number of parties, indicated either by their common initialism (e.g., "LC" for Library of Congress, "PCC" for Program for Cooperative Cataloging) or by their general category (e.g., "Publishers," "National Libraries"). When the recommendation is addressed to "All," it is intended for the library community as a whole and its close collaborators.
The Library of Congress must begin by prioritizing the recommendations that are directed in whole or in part at LC. Some define tasks that can be achieved immediately and with moderate effort; others will require analysis and planning that will have to be coordinated broadly and carefully. The Working Group has consciously not associated time frames with any of its recommendations. The recommendations fall into five general areas: 1. Increase the efficiency of bibliographic production for all libraries through increased cooperation and increased sharing of bibliographic records, and by maximizing the use of data produced throughout the entire "supply chain" for information resources. 2. Transfer effort into higher-value activity. In particular, expand the possibilities for knowledge creation by "exposing" rare and unique materials held by libraries that are currently hidden from view and, thus, underused. 3. Position our technology for the future by recognizing that the World Wide Web is both our technology platform and the appropriate platform for the delivery of our standards. Recognize that people are not the only users of the data we produce in the name of bibliographic control, but so too are machine applications that interact with those data in a variety of ways. 4. Position our community for the future by facilitating the incorporation of evaluative and other user-supplied information into our resource descriptions. Work to realize the potential of the FRBR framework for revealing and capitalizing on the various relationships that exist among information resources. 5. Strengthen the library profession through education and the development of metrics that will inform decision-making now and in the future. The Working Group intends what follows to serve as a broad blueprint for the Library of Congress and its colleagues in the library and information technology communities for extending and promoting access to information resources.
- Editor
- Library of Congress / Working Group on the Future of Bibliographic Control
-
DeZelar-Tiedman, V.: Doing the LibraryThing(TM) in an academic library catalog (2008)
0.03
0.03138158 = product of:
0.070608556 = sum of:
0.0296935 = product of:
0.059387 = sum of:
0.059387 = weight(_text_:headings in 2666) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.059387 = score(doc=2666,freq=6.0), product of:
0.15996648 = queryWeight, product of:
4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.37124652 = fieldWeight in 2666, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2666)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.020155499 = weight(_text_:library in 2666) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.020155499 = score(doc=2666,freq=8.0), product of:
0.08672522 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.23240642 = fieldWeight in 2666, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2666)
0.011822038 = weight(_text_:of in 2666) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.011822038 = score(doc=2666,freq=22.0), product of:
0.05157766 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.2292085 = fieldWeight in 2666, product of:
4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
22.0 = termFreq=22.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2666)
0.0089375265 = product of:
0.017875053 = sum of:
0.017875053 = weight(_text_:22 in 2666) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.017875053 = score(doc=2666,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11550141 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = 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)
0.44444445 = coord(4/9)
- 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
-
Pera, M.S.; Lund, W.; Ng, Y.-K.: ¬A sophisticated library search strategy using folksonomies and similarity matching (2009)
0.03
0.027606823 = product of:
0.08282047 = sum of:
0.021429438 = product of:
0.042858876 = sum of:
0.042858876 = weight(_text_:headings in 2939) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042858876 = score(doc=2939,freq=2.0), product of:
0.15996648 = queryWeight, product of:
4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.2679241 = fieldWeight in 2939, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2939)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.048788697 = weight(_text_:library in 2939) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.048788697 = score(doc=2939,freq=30.0), product of:
0.08672522 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.5625664 = fieldWeight in 2939, product of:
5.477226 = tf(freq=30.0), with freq of:
30.0 = termFreq=30.0
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2939)
0.012602335 = weight(_text_:of in 2939) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012602335 = score(doc=2939,freq=16.0), product of:
0.05157766 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.24433708 = fieldWeight in 2939, product of:
4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
16.0 = termFreq=16.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2939)
0.33333334 = coord(3/9)
- Abstract
- Libraries, private and public, offer valuable resources to library patrons. As of today, the only way to locate information archived exclusively in libraries is through their catalogs. Library patrons, however, often find it difficult to formulate a proper query, which requires using specific keywords assigned to different fields of desired library catalog records, to obtain relevant results. These improperly formulated queries often yield irrelevant results or no results at all. This negative experience in dealing with existing library systems turns library patrons away from directly querying library catalogs; instead, they rely on Web search engines to perform their searches first, and upon obtaining the initial information (e.g., titles, subject headings, or authors) on the desired library materials, they query library catalogs. This searching strategy is an evidence of failure of today's library systems. In solving this problem, we propose an enhanced library system, which allows partial, similarity matching of (a) tags defined by ordinary users at a folksonomy site that describe the content of books and (b) unrestricted keywords specified by an ordinary library patron in a query to search for relevant library catalog records. The proposed library system allows patrons posting a query Q using commonly used words and ranks the retrieved results according to their degrees of resemblance with Q while maintaining the query processing time comparable with that achieved by current library search engines.
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2009) no.7, S.1392-1406
-
Walker, J.M.: Faceted vocabularies in catalog searches : provenance evidence vocabulary as search terms or limiters for a personal library collection (2023)
0.03
0.026614984 = product of:
0.07984495 = sum of:
0.04242812 = product of:
0.08485624 = sum of:
0.08485624 = weight(_text_:headings in 1173) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08485624 = score(doc=1173,freq=4.0), product of:
0.15996648 = queryWeight, product of:
4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.5304626 = fieldWeight in 1173, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
4.849944 = idf(docFreq=940, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1173)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.024941156 = weight(_text_:library in 1173) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024941156 = score(doc=1173,freq=4.0), product of:
0.08672522 = queryWeight, product of:
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.28758827 = fieldWeight in 1173, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1173)
0.012475675 = weight(_text_:of in 1173) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.012475675 = score(doc=1173,freq=8.0), product of:
0.05157766 = queryWeight, product of:
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.03298316 = queryNorm
0.24188137 = fieldWeight in 1173, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1173)
0.33333334 = coord(3/9)
- Abstract
- Genre/Form headings are an important means by which librarians provide users with contextual or descriptive information. To facilitate the discovery of resources with important provenance characteristics, the Marion E. Wade Center added terms from a controlled vocabulary to bibliographic records representing items in the C. S. Lewis personal library collection. The selected terms focus on features that have historically been of interest to visitors. The addition of these headings in the bibliographic records allows users to use these keywords to conduct a search or narrow their results, resulting in more flexibility to locate and select the resources that best meet their needs.
- Footnote
- Beitrag in Themenheft: Implementation of Faceted Vocabularies.
