Search (5 results, page 1 of 1)

0.030666022 = product of:
  0.061332043 = sum of:
    0.026799891 = weight(_text_:library in 2827) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026799891 = score(doc=2827,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.20335563 = fieldWeight in 2827, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2827)
    0.034532152 = product of:
      0.069064304 = sum of:
        0.069064304 = weight(_text_:project in 2827) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.069064304 = score(doc=2827,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21156175 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.32644984 = fieldWeight in 2827, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2827)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Authority Control (AC) is an important cataloging function aimed at achieving catalog consistency. It is very time-consuming and labor-intensive. During the 1990s, many North American academic libraries, under budgetary constraints, have tried to outsource AC activities. The Cataloging Department of the University of Saskatchewan Libraries (USL) outsourced its AC activities to the Library Technology Inc. (LTI), a United States-based AC processing vendor. This paper summarizes the experiences gained by USL in this AC project: the decision-making process in the selection of LTI; pre- and post-database clean-up by LTI; and, the current AC activities.

0.030079912 = product of:
  0.060159825 = sum of:
    0.039787523 = weight(_text_:library in 1187) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.039787523 = score(doc=1187,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.30190483 = fieldWeight in 1187, 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=1187)
    0.0203723 = product of:
      0.0407446 = sum of:
        0.0407446 = weight(_text_:22 in 1187) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0407446 = score(doc=1187,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1187, 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=1187)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Subject access to monographs through online public access catalogs (OPACs) has always been a major concern for large research and/or academic libraries. Academic library practice of providing subject access to monographs has proven inadequate, especially in the case of composite works. Many techniques have been proposed to enhance subject treatment of monographs in OPACs. This article briefly reviews these efforts in the past and presents the case of adding Tables of Contents as one of the Most useful and probably also one of the Most costeffective ways of improving subject access to Monographs in an academic environment.

Date

22. 9.1997 19:16:05

Imprint

Urbana-Champaign, IL : Illinois University at Urbana-Champaign, Graduate School of Library and Information Science

Source

Saving the time of the library user through subject access innovation: Papers in honor of Pauline Atherton Cochrane. Ed.: W.J. Wheeler

0.011604695 = product of:
  0.04641878 = sum of:
    0.04641878 = weight(_text_:library in 967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04641878 = score(doc=967,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.3522223 = fieldWeight in 967, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=967)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Internet resources have brought great excitement but also grave concerns to the library world, especially to the cataloging community. In spite of the various problematic aspects presented by Internet resources (poorly organized, lack of stability, variable quality), catalogers have decided that they are worth cataloging, in particular those meeting library selection criteria. This paper tries to trace the decade-long history of the library comrnunity's efforts in providing an effective way to catalog Internet resources. Basically, its olbjective is to answer the following questions: Why catalog? What to catalog? and, How to catalog. Some issues of cataloging electronic journals and developments of the Dublin Core Metadata system are also discussed.

0.010828791 = product of:
  0.043315165 = sum of:
    0.043315165 = weight(_text_:library in 254) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.043315165 = score(doc=254,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.32867232 = fieldWeight in 254, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=254)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This comparative study was conducted to compare error rates encountered in monograph copy cataloging bibliographic records before and after a cataloging outsourcing program was implemented at the University of Saskatchewan Library. The findings of the study were twofold: (1) The error rates were low and acceptable; (2) There was no significant difference between error rates before and after outsourcing.

0.0057428335 = product of:
  0.022971334 = sum of:
    0.022971334 = weight(_text_:library in 5720) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022971334 = score(doc=5720,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.17430481 = fieldWeight in 5720, 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=5720)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

This study was conducted to investigate the quality control (QC) issues in cataloging outsourcing programs implemented in US and Canadian academic libraries. Most libraries provided the outsourcing vendors with detailed cataloging and/orprocessing specifications before the outsourcing programs started. They have set up QC procedures as an integral part of their outsourcing operations. In most cases, both librarian-catalogers and senior library assistants/technicians were involved in the QC programs. The error rates reported were low and the majority of bibliographic records provided by the vendors were either LC/OCLC records or records compatible with the Core-Level Standard recommended by the Cooperative Cataloging Council's Task Group on Standards. A large majority of these libraries were satisfied with the services provided by the outsourcing vendors. Based on the definition of quality of cataloging as a combination of Accuracy, Consistency, Adequacy of Access Points, and Timeliness, most libraries reported that the quality of their Library's cataloging was not affected by the outsourcing programs.