Search (21 results, page 1 of 2)

  • × language_ss:"e"
  • × theme_ss:"Normdateien"
  1. Horn, M.E.: "Garbage" in, "refuse and refuse disposal" out : making the most of the subject authority file in the OPAC (2002) 0.05
    0.047206 = product of:
      0.070809 = sum of:
        0.0469695 = weight(_text_:search in 156) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0469695 = score(doc=156,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.2688082 = fieldWeight in 156, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=156)
        0.0238395 = product of:
          0.047679 = sum of:
            0.047679 = weight(_text_:22 in 156) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.047679 = score(doc=156,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17604718 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05027291 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 156, 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=156)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    Subject access in the OPAC, as discussed in this article, is predicated on two different kinds of searching: subject (authority, alphabetic, or controlled vocabulary searching) or keyword (uncontrolled, free text, natural language vocabulary). The literature has focused on demonstrating that both approaches are needed, but very few authors address the need to integrate keyword into authority searching. The article discusses this difference and compares, with a query on the term garbage, search results in two online catalogs, one that performs keyword searches through the authority file and one where only bibliographic records are included in keyword searches.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  2. Danowski, P.: Authority files and Web 2.0 : Wikipedia and the PND. An Example (2007) 0.03
    0.03371857 = product of:
      0.050577857 = sum of:
        0.03354964 = weight(_text_:search in 1291) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03354964 = score(doc=1291,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.19200584 = fieldWeight in 1291, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1291)
        0.017028214 = product of:
          0.03405643 = sum of:
            0.03405643 = weight(_text_:22 in 1291) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03405643 = score(doc=1291,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17604718 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05027291 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1291, 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=1291)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
    
    Abstract
    More and more users index everything on their own in the web 2.0. There are services for links, videos, pictures, books, encyclopaedic articles and scientific articles. All these services are library independent. But must that really be? Can't libraries help with their experience and tools to make user indexing better? On the experience of a project from German language Wikipedia together with the German person authority files (Personen Namen Datei - PND) located at German National Library (Deutsche Nationalbibliothek) I would like to show what is possible. How users can and will use the authority files, if we let them. We will take a look how the project worked and what we can learn for future projects. Conclusions - Authority files can have a role in the web 2.0 - there must be an open interface/ service for retrieval - everything that is indexed on the net with authority files can be easy integrated in a federated search - O'Reilly: You have to found ways that your data get more important that more it will be used
    Content
    Vortrag anlässlich des Workshops: "Extending the multilingual capacity of The European Library in the EDL project Stockholm, Swedish National Library, 22-23 November 2007".
  3. Dickson, J.; Zadner, P.: Authority control and the authority file : a functional evaluation of LCNAF on RLIN (1989) 0.02
    0.015656501 = product of:
      0.0469695 = sum of:
        0.0469695 = weight(_text_:search in 425) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0469695 = score(doc=425,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.2688082 = fieldWeight in 425, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=425)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    The costs of authority control are high and the information provided in authority files is often duplicated in separate bibliographic files. Librarians need to examine the compatibility of traditional methods of authority control with the advanced capabilities of current computer systems. This study investigates the actual use of the Library of Congress Name Authority File (LCNAF) by catalogers in an RLIN member library. Results show that some aspects of authority control could be expedited by changes in cataloging practice and search software.
  4. Wiederhold, R.A.; Reeve, G.F.: Authority control today : principles, practices, and trends (2021) 0.02
    0.015656501 = product of:
      0.0469695 = sum of:
        0.0469695 = weight(_text_:search in 696) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0469695 = score(doc=696,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.2688082 = fieldWeight in 696, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=696)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Authority control enhances the accessibility of library resources by controlling the choice and form of access points, improving users' ability to efficiently find the works most relevant to their information search. While authority control and the technologies that support its implementation continue to evolve, the underlying principles and purposes remain the same. Written primarily for a new generation of librarians, this paper illuminates the importance of authority control in cataloging and library database management, discusses its history, describes current practices, and introduces readers to trends and issues in the field, including future applications beyond the library catalog.
  5. Smith, C.: Controlled vocabularies : past, present and future of subject access (2021) 0.02
    0.015656501 = product of:
      0.0469695 = sum of:
        0.0469695 = weight(_text_:search in 704) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0469695 = score(doc=704,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.2688082 = fieldWeight in 704, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=704)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Controlled vocabularies are a foundational concept in library science and provide a framework for consistency in cataloging practices. Subject headings provide valuable access points to library resources during search and discovery for patrons. Many librarians will be familiar with the more widely used controlled vocabularies, like those maintained by national libraries or major professional organizations. More recently, there has been an increasing shift toward specialized vocabularies maintained by independent entities intended for much narrower use. While there is valid criticism of the nature or content of controlled vocabularies, they will likely continue to be an important feature in information organization.
  6. Leth, P.: Subject access - the Swedish approach (2007) 0.01
    0.013622571 = product of:
      0.040867712 = sum of:
        0.040867712 = product of:
          0.081735425 = sum of:
            0.081735425 = weight(_text_:22 in 131) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.081735425 = score(doc=131,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17604718 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05027291 = queryNorm
                0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 131, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=131)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Content
    Vortrag anlässlich des Workshops: "Extending the multilingual capacity of The European Library in the EDL project Stockholm, Swedish National Library, 22-23 November 2007".
  7. Hengel, C.: Mapping name authorities : the Virtual International Authority File (VIAF) (2007) 0.01
    0.013622571 = product of:
      0.040867712 = sum of:
        0.040867712 = product of:
          0.081735425 = sum of:
            0.081735425 = weight(_text_:22 in 1266) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.081735425 = score(doc=1266,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17604718 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05027291 = queryNorm
                0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 1266, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1266)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Content
    Vortrag anlässlich des Workshops: "Extending the multilingual capacity of The European Library in the EDL project Stockholm, Swedish National Library, 22-23 November 2007".
  8. Goossens, P.: Authority control : trends and challenges (2007) 0.01
    0.013622571 = product of:
      0.040867712 = sum of:
        0.040867712 = product of:
          0.081735425 = sum of:
            0.081735425 = weight(_text_:22 in 1290) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.081735425 = score(doc=1290,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17604718 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05027291 = queryNorm
                0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 1290, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=1290)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Content
    Vortrag anlässlich des Workshops: "Extending the multilingual capacity of The European Library in the EDL project Stockholm, Swedish National Library, 22-23 November 2007".
  9. O'Neill, E.T.; Bennett, R.; Kammerer, K.: Using authorities to improve subject searches (2012) 0.01
    0.013419857 = product of:
      0.04025957 = sum of:
        0.04025957 = weight(_text_:search in 310) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04025957 = score(doc=310,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.230407 = fieldWeight in 310, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=310)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Authority files have played an important role in improving the quality of indexing and subject cataloging. Although authorities can significantly improve search by increasing the number of access points, they are rarely an integral part of the information retrieval process, particularly end-users searches. A retrieval prototype, searchFAST, was developed to test the feasibility of using an authority file as an index to bibliographic records. searchFAST uses FAST (Faceted Application of Subject Terminology) as an index to OCLC's WorldCat.org bibliographic database. The searchFAST methodology complements, rather than replaces, existing WorldCat.org access. The bibliographic file is searched indirectly; first the authority file is searched to identify appropriate subject headings, then the headings are used to retrieve the matching bibliographic records. The prototype demonstrates the effectiveness and practicality of using an authority file as an index. Searching the authority file leverages authority control work by increasing the number of access points while supporting a simple interface designed for end-users.
  10. DiLauro, T.; Choudhury, G.S.; Patton, M.; Warner, J.W.; Brown, E.W.: Automated name authority control and enhanced searching in the Levy collection (2001) 0.01
    0.012652363 = product of:
      0.037957087 = sum of:
        0.037957087 = weight(_text_:search in 1160) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037957087 = score(doc=1160,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.21722981 = fieldWeight in 1160, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1160)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    This paper is the second in a series in D-Lib Magazine and describes a workflow management system being developed by the Digital Knowledge Center (DKC) at the Milton S. Eisenhower Library (MSEL) of The Johns Hopkins University. Based on experience from digitizing the Lester S. Levy Collection of Sheet Music, it was apparent that large-scale digitization efforts require a significant amount of human labor that is both time-consuming and costly. Consequently, this workflow management system aims to reduce the amount of human labor and time for large-scale digitization projects. The mission of this second phase of the project ("Levy II") can be summarized as follows: * Reduce costs for large collection ingestion by creating a suite of open-source processes, tools, and interfaces for workflow management * Increase access capabilities by providing a suite of research tools * Demonstrate utility of tools and processes with a subset of the online Levy Collection The cornerstones of the workflow management system include optical music recognition (OMR) software and an automated name authority control system (ANAC). The OMR software generates a logical representation of the score for sound generation, music searching, and musicological research. The ANAC disambiguates names, associating each name with an individual (e.g., the composer Septimus Winner also published under the pseudonyms Alice Hawthorne and Apsley Street, among others). Complementing the workflow tools, a suite of research tools focuses upon enhanced searching capabilities through the development and application of a fast, disk-based search engine for lyrics and music and the incorporation of an XML structure for metadata. The first paper (Choudhury et al. 2001) described the OMR software and musical components of Levy II. This paper focuses on the metadata and intellectual access components that include automated name authority control and the aforementioned search engine.
  11. Francu, V.; Dediu, L.-I.: TinREAD - an integrative solution for subject authority control (2015) 0.01
    0.011183213 = product of:
      0.03354964 = sum of:
        0.03354964 = weight(_text_:search in 2297) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03354964 = score(doc=2297,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.19200584 = fieldWeight in 2297, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2297)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    The paper introduces TinREAD (The Information Navigator for Readers), an integrated library system produced by IME Romania. The main feature of interest is the way TinREAD can handle a classification-based thesaurus in which verbal index terms are mapped to classification notations. It supports subject authority control interlinking the authority files (subject headings and UDC system). Authority files are used for indexing consistency. Although it is said that intellectual indexing is, unlike automated indexing, both subjective and inconsistent, TinREAD is using intellectual indexing as input (the UDC notations assigned to documents) for the automated indexing resulting from the implementation of a thesaurus structure based on UDC. Each UDC notation is represented by a UNIMARC subject heading record as authority data. One classification notation can be used to search simultaneously into more than one corresponding thesaurus. This way natural language terms are used in indexing and, at the same time, the link with the corresponding classification notation is kept. Additionally, the system can also manage multilingual data for the authority files. This, together with other characteristics of TinREAD are largely discussed and illustrated in the paper. Problems encountered and possible solutions to tackle them are shown.
  12. El-Sherbini, M.A.: Cataloging and classification : review of the literature 2005-06 (2008) 0.01
    0.009081715 = product of:
      0.027245143 = sum of:
        0.027245143 = product of:
          0.054490287 = sum of:
            0.054490287 = weight(_text_:22 in 249) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.054490287 = score(doc=249,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17604718 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05027291 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 249, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=249)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  13. Wang, S.; Koopman, R.: Second life for authority records (2015) 0.01
    0.0089465715 = product of:
      0.026839713 = sum of:
        0.026839713 = weight(_text_:search in 2303) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026839713 = score(doc=2303,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.15360467 = fieldWeight in 2303, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2303)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    Authority control is a standard practice in the library community that provides consistent, unique, and unambiguous reference to entities such as persons, places, concepts, etc. The ideal way of referring to authority records through unique identifiers is in line with the current linked data principle. When presenting a bibliographic record, the linked authority records are expanded with the authoritative information. This way, any update in the authority records will not affect the indexing of the bibliographic records. The structural information in the authority files can also be leveraged to expand the user's query to retrieve bibliographic records associated with all the variations, narrower terms or related terms. However, in many digital libraries, especially largescale aggregations such as WorldCat and Europeana, name strings are often used instead of authority record identifiers. This is also partly due to the lack of global authority records that are valid across countries and cultural heritage domains. But even when there are global authority systems, they are not applied at scale. For example, in WorldCat, only 15% of the records have DDC and 3% have UDC codes; less than 40% of the records have one or more topical terms catalogued in the 650 MARC field, many of which are too general (such as "sports" or "literature") to be useful for retrieving bibliographic records. Therefore, when a user query is based on a Dewey code, the results usually have high precision but the recall is much lower than it should be; and, a search on a general topical term returns millions of hits without being even complete. All these practices make it difficult to leverage the key benefits of authority files. This is also true for authority files that have been transformed into linked data and enriched with mapping information. There are practical reasons for using name strings instead of identifiers. One is the indexing and query response. The future infrastructure design should take the performance into account while embracing the benefit of linking instead of copying, without introducing extra complexity to users. Notwithstanding all the restrictions, we argue that largescale aggregations also bring new opportunities for better exploiting the benefits of authority records. It is possible to use machine learning techniques to automatically link bibliographic records to authority records based on the manual input of cataloguers. Text mining and visualization techniques can offer a contextual view of authority records, which in return can be used to retrieve missing or mis-catalogued records. In this talk, we will describe such opportunities in more detail.
  14. Hickey, T.B.; Toves, J.; O'Neill, E.T.: NACO normalization : a detailed examination of the authority file comparison rules (2006) 0.01
    0.007946501 = product of:
      0.0238395 = sum of:
        0.0238395 = product of:
          0.047679 = sum of:
            0.047679 = weight(_text_:22 in 5760) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.047679 = score(doc=5760,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17604718 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05027291 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5760, 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=5760)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  15. Wolverton, R.E.: Becoming an authority on authority control : an annotated bibliography of resources (2006) 0.01
    0.007946501 = product of:
      0.0238395 = sum of:
        0.0238395 = product of:
          0.047679 = sum of:
            0.047679 = weight(_text_:22 in 120) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.047679 = score(doc=120,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17604718 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05027291 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 120, 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=120)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  16. Russell, B.M.; Spillane, J.L.: Using the Web for name authority work (2001) 0.01
    0.007946501 = product of:
      0.0238395 = sum of:
        0.0238395 = product of:
          0.047679 = sum of:
            0.047679 = weight(_text_:22 in 167) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.047679 = score(doc=167,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17604718 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05027291 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 167, 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=167)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  17. Vellucci, S.L.: Metadata and authority control (2000) 0.01
    0.007946501 = product of:
      0.0238395 = sum of:
        0.0238395 = product of:
          0.047679 = sum of:
            0.047679 = weight(_text_:22 in 180) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.047679 = score(doc=180,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17604718 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05027291 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 180, 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=180)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  18. Kaiser, M.; Lieder, H.J.; Majcen, K.; Vallant, H.: New ways of sharing and using authority information : the LEAF project (2003) 0.01
    0.007907727 = product of:
      0.02372318 = sum of:
        0.02372318 = weight(_text_:search in 1166) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02372318 = score(doc=1166,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.13576864 = fieldWeight in 1166, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1166)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Abstract
    This article presents an overview of the LEAF project (Linking and Exploring Authority Files)1, which has set out to provide a framework for international, collaborative work in the sector of authority data with respect to authority control. Elaborating the virtues of authority control in today's Web environment is an almost futile exercise, since so much has been said and written about it in the last few years.2 The World Wide Web is generally understood to be poorly structured-both with regard to content and to locating required information. Highly structured databases might be viewed as small islands of precision within this chaotic environment. Though the Web in general or any particular structured database would greatly benefit from increased authority control, it should be noted that our following considerations only refer to authority control with regard to databases of "memory institutions" (i.e., libraries, archives, and museums). Moreover, when talking about authority records, we exclusively refer to personal name authority records that describe a specific person. Although different types of authority records could indeed be used in similar ways to the ones presented in this article, discussing those different types is outside the scope of both the LEAF project and this article. Personal name authority records-as are all other "authorities"-are maintained as separate records and linked to various kinds of descriptive records. Name authority records are usually either kept in independent databases or in separate tables in the database containing the descriptive records. This practice points at a crucial benefit: by linking any number of descriptive records to an authorized name record, the records related to this entity are collocated in the database. Variant forms of the authorized name are referenced in the authority records and thus ensure the consistency of the database while enabling search and retrieval operations that produce accurate results. On one hand, authority control may be viewed as a positive prerequisite of a consistent catalogue; on the other, the creation of new authority records is a very time consuming and expensive undertaking. As a consequence, various models of providing access to existing authority records have emerged: the Library of Congress and the French National Library (Bibliothèque nationale de France), for example, make their authority records available to all via a web-based search service.3 In Germany, the Personal Name Authority File (PND, Personennamendatei4) maintained by the German National Library (Die Deutsche Bibliothek, Frankfurt/Main) offers a different approach to shared access: within a closed network, participating institutions have online access to their pooled data. The number of recent projects and initiatives that have addressed the issue of authority control in one way or another is considerable.5 Two important current initiatives should be mentioned here: The Name Authority Cooperative (NACO) and Virtual International Authority File (VIAF).
  19. Bee, G.: CrissCross (2006) 0.01
    0.0078282505 = product of:
      0.02348475 = sum of:
        0.02348475 = weight(_text_:search in 1275) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.02348475 = score(doc=1275,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1747324 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.05027291 = queryNorm
            0.1344041 = fieldWeight in 1275, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.475677 = idf(docFreq=3718, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=1275)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Content
    Ein weiteres Fundament sind die Vorarbeiten aus dem gemeinsam von DNB, der Schweizerischen Landesbibliothek und anderen Partnern betriebenen Projekt Multilingual Access to Subjects (MACS). Im Rahmen von MACS wurden in größerem Umfang LCSH und Rameau-Datensätze miteinander verknüpft; einigen der dabei entstandenen Schlagwortpärchen wurde dabei bereits ein SWD-Äquivalent zugeordnet. Dreierverbindungen dieses Typs, erweitert um DDC-Notationen, werden auch im Rahmen von CrissCross entstehen. Die unterschiedliche Strukturierung der einzelnen Schlagwortsprachen sorgt allerdings für eine Vielzahl von Problemen, die das Projektteam bewältigen muss. Durch die Verlinkung der Schlagwortsprachen und die Verknüpfung mit der DDC erstellt CrissCross ein multilinguales verbales Recherchevokabular. Ungewöhnlich und innovativ ist dabei vor allem die Verbindung von verbaler und klassifikatorischer Sacherschließung, die zu einer bedeutenden Erweiterung der Recherchemöglichkeiten führen wird. Dies wird vor allem dann der Fall sein, wenn in Onlineumgebungen nutzbare Hilfsmittel wie das von der DNB zurzeit entwickelte Normdatenrecherchetool zur Verfügung stehen. In naher Zukunft wird der Nutzer dann bei seiner Suche auf eine Vielzahl unterschiedlich erschlossener Werke stoßen, ohne dass ihm die im Hintergrund vollzogene Auswertung von Normdaten bewusst sein muss. Er braucht im Grunde genommen überhaupt kein Vorwissen über Sacherschließungsinstrumente mitzubringen. »Simplify your search«, könnte das Motto dieser Vorgehensweise lauten. Die Nutzerfreundlichkeit der Bibliotheken wird durch den Einsatz derartiger Instrumente eine deutliche Steigerung erfahren. CrissCross wird seinen Teil dazu beitragen."
  20. Byrum, J.D.: ¬The emerging global bibliographical network : the era of international standardization in the development of cataloging policy (2000) 0.01
    0.0056760716 = product of:
      0.017028214 = sum of:
        0.017028214 = product of:
          0.03405643 = sum of:
            0.03405643 = weight(_text_:22 in 190) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03405643 = score(doc=190,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17604718 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.05027291 = 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)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
    
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22