Search (185 results, page 2 of 10)

  • × theme_ss:"Datenformate"
  1. MARC and metadata : METS, MODS, and MARCXML: current and future implications (2004) 0.05
    0.050567575 = product of:
      0.10113515 = sum of:
        0.053599782 = weight(_text_:library in 7196) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.053599782 = score(doc=7196,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.40671125 = fieldWeight in 7196, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=7196)
        0.047535364 = product of:
          0.09507073 = sum of:
            0.09507073 = weight(_text_:22 in 7196) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.09507073 = score(doc=7196,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050121464 = queryNorm
                0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 7196, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=7196)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Source
    Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1
  2. MARC and metadata : METS, MODS, and MARCXML: current and future implications part 2 (2004) 0.05
    0.050567575 = product of:
      0.10113515 = sum of:
        0.053599782 = weight(_text_:library in 2841) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.053599782 = score(doc=2841,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.40671125 = fieldWeight in 2841, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2841)
        0.047535364 = product of:
          0.09507073 = sum of:
            0.09507073 = weight(_text_:22 in 2841) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.09507073 = score(doc=2841,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050121464 = queryNorm
                0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 2841, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2841)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Source
    Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2
  3. Kokabi, M.: ¬The internationalization of MARC : Pt.1: the emergence and divergence of MARC (1996) 0.05
    0.049779683 = product of:
      0.09955937 = sum of:
        0.068930924 = weight(_text_:digital in 6726) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.068930924 = score(doc=6726,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.34865242 = fieldWeight in 6726, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6726)
        0.030628446 = weight(_text_:library in 6726) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030628446 = score(doc=6726,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.23240642 = fieldWeight in 6726, 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=6726)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    Surveys the evolution and development of MARC formats for the digital encoding of bibliographic data from their beginnings in 1968 at the Library of Congress to the present time, with particular emphasis on the development of 17 national formats. Examines the reasons for the divergence of MARC formats from each other as well as the early and recent trends in the development of national MARC formats
  4. McDonough, J.P.: SGML and USMARC standard : applying markup to bibliographic data (1998) 0.05
    0.049779683 = product of:
      0.09955937 = sum of:
        0.068930924 = weight(_text_:digital in 1425) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.068930924 = score(doc=1425,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.34865242 = fieldWeight in 1425, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1425)
        0.030628446 = weight(_text_:library in 1425) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030628446 = score(doc=1425,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.23240642 = fieldWeight in 1425, 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=1425)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    The recent increase in electronic publishing has led many in the library community to consider altering standards for bibliographic data to promote greater compatibility between digital works and their bibliographic representation. SGML has been prominently mentioned as a mechanism for encoding bibliographic data. Examines the problems and potential of applying SGML to to USMARC record standard, with a particular emphasis on issues of field order and repeatability, character set encoding, and obsolete fields
  5. German, L.: Bibliographic utilities (2009) 0.05
    0.049779683 = product of:
      0.09955937 = sum of:
        0.068930924 = weight(_text_:digital in 3858) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.068930924 = score(doc=3858,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.34865242 = fieldWeight in 3858, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3858)
        0.030628446 = weight(_text_:library in 3858) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030628446 = score(doc=3858,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.23240642 = fieldWeight in 3858, 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=3858)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Content
    Digital unter: http://dx.doi.org/10.1081/E-ELIS3-120044472. Vgl.: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/book/10.1081/E-ELIS3.
    Source
    Encyclopedia of library and information sciences. 3rd ed. Ed.: M.J. Bates
  6. Byrne, D.J.: MARC manual : understanding and using MARC records (1998) 0.04
    0.043343633 = product of:
      0.08668727 = sum of:
        0.045942668 = weight(_text_:library in 6077) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.045942668 = score(doc=6077,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.34860963 = fieldWeight in 6077, 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=6077)
        0.0407446 = product of:
          0.0814892 = sum of:
            0.0814892 = weight(_text_:22 in 6077) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0814892 = score(doc=6077,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050121464 = queryNorm
                0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 6077, 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=6077)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Date
    2. 8.2001 16:22:33
    Footnote
    Rez. in: Library review 48(1999) nos.3/4, S.204-205 (K.V. Trickey)
  7. Setting the record straight : understanding the MARC format (1993) 0.04
    0.041876666 = product of:
      0.08375333 = sum of:
        0.032486375 = weight(_text_:library in 2327) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032486375 = score(doc=2327,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.24650425 = fieldWeight in 2327, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2327)
        0.051266953 = product of:
          0.10253391 = sum of:
            0.10253391 = weight(_text_:project in 2327) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.10253391 = score(doc=2327,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.21156175 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050121464 = queryNorm
                0.48465237 = fieldWeight in 2327, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2327)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    MARC is an acronym for Machine Readable Catalogue or Cataloguing. This general description, howcver, is rather misleading as MARC is neither a kind of catalogue nor a method of cataloguing. In fact, MARC is a Standardformat for representing bibliographic information for handling by computer. While the MARC format was primarily designed to serve the needs of libraries, the concept has since been embraced by the wider information community as a convenient way of storing and exchanging bibliographic data. The original MARC format was developed at the Library of Congress in 1965-6 leading to a pilot project, known as MARC I, which had the aim of investigating the feasibility of producing machine-readable catalogue data. Similar work was in progress in the United Kingdom whcre the Council of the British National Bibliography had set up the BNB MARC Project with the rennt of examining the use of machine-readable data in producing the printed British National Bibliography (BNB). These parallel developments led to Anglo-American co-operation an the MARC 11 project which was initiated in 1968. MARC II was to prove instrumental in defining the concept of MARC as a communications format.
    Imprint
    London : British Library
  8. Tennant, R.: ¬A bibliographic metadata infrastructure for the twenty-first century (2004) 0.04
    0.040864773 = product of:
      0.081729546 = sum of:
        0.043315165 = weight(_text_:library in 2845) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043315165 = score(doc=2845,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.32867232 = fieldWeight in 2845, 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=2845)
        0.038414378 = product of:
          0.076828755 = sum of:
            0.076828755 = weight(_text_:22 in 2845) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.076828755 = score(doc=2845,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050121464 = queryNorm
                0.4377287 = fieldWeight in 2845, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2845)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    The current library bibliographic infrastructure was constructed in the early days of computers - before the Web, XML, and a variety of other technological advances that now offer new opportunities. General requirements of a modern metadata infrastructure for libraries are identified, including such qualities as versatility, extensibility, granularity, and openness. A new kind of metadata infrastructure is then proposed that exhibits at least some of those qualities. Some key challenges that must be overcome to implement a change of this magnitude are identified.
    Date
    9.12.2005 19:22:38
    Source
    Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2, S.175-181
  9. Brownrigg, E.; Butler, B.: ¬An electronic library communications format : a definition and development proposal for MARC III (1990) 0.04
    0.040475465 = product of:
      0.08095093 = sum of:
        0.04641878 = weight(_text_:library in 2326) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04641878 = score(doc=2326,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.3522223 = fieldWeight in 2326, 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=2326)
        0.034532152 = product of:
          0.069064304 = sum of:
            0.069064304 = weight(_text_:project in 2326) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.069064304 = score(doc=2326,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.21156175 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050121464 = queryNorm
                0.32644984 = fieldWeight in 2326, 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=2326)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    The Memex Research Institute has proposed a research project to describe in machine-readable form all the information needed to create electronic "books" in a standard communications format. Two kinds of extended computer file formats employing the MARC structure will be defined: Access Formats that take into consideration the many existing index and abstract system formats and their associated databases; and Document Formats that provide for storage, representation, transmission, and display of machine-readabie works in text or image form. The formats that emerge can be employed by libraries, publishers, information utilities, and computer users worldwide to convert printed works to electronic forms or to create original works in electric format, and thus foment the creation of networked electronic library collections.
    Source
    Library hi tech. 8(1990) no.3, issue 31, S.21-32
  10. IFLA Cataloguing Principles : steps towards an International Cataloguing Code. Report from the 1st Meeting of Experts on an International Cataloguing Code, Frankfurt 2003 (2004) 0.04
    0.03686449 = product of:
      0.04915265 = sum of:
        0.024370763 = weight(_text_:digital in 2312) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024370763 = score(doc=2312,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.12326725 = fieldWeight in 2312, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2312)
        0.010828791 = weight(_text_:library in 2312) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010828791 = score(doc=2312,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.08216808 = fieldWeight in 2312, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2312)
        0.013953096 = product of:
          0.027906192 = sum of:
            0.027906192 = weight(_text_:project in 2312) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.027906192 = score(doc=2312,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.21156175 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050121464 = queryNorm
                0.13190566 = fieldWeight in 2312, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=2312)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.75 = coord(3/4)
    
    Footnote
    The book is organized into four sections: introduction and results; presentation papers; background papers; and an appendix. The introduction by Barbara Tillett serves as a summary and report of the IME ICC meeting itself. The statement of the purpose of the meeting bears reporting in full (p. 6): "The goal for this meeting was to increase the ability to share cataloguing information worldwide by promoting standards for the content of bibliographic records and authority records used in library catalogues." The next item is a report summarizing the cataloguing Code comparisons prepared prior to the conference. As a mechanism for discussion, 18 codes were compared with the Paris Principles, the extent of compliance or divergence noted and discussed by representatives from the respective rule-making bodies. During the meeting the presentation of the comparisons took up half of the first day, but for the detailed responses one must return to the IME ICC website. The published summary is very dense, and difficult to follow if one is not very familiar with the Paris Principles or the codes being compared. The main outcome of the meeting follows, this is the Statement of International Cataloguing Principles (draft, as approved Dec. 19, 2003 by IME ICC participants), accompanied by a useful Glossary. The most important eontribution of this volume is to serve as the permanent and official record of the Statement as it stands after the first IME ICC meeting. Subsequent meetings will surely suggest modifications and enhancements, but this version of the Statement needs to be widely read and commented on. To this end the website also makes available translations of the Statement into 15 European languages, and the glossary into four languages. Compared to the Paris Principles, this statement covers some familiar ground in the choice of access points and forms of names, but its overall scope is broader, explicitly referring to the role of authority records, entities in bibliographic records and relationships. It concludes with an appendix of "Objectives for the construction of cataloguing codes."
    The next section collects three papers, all presented at the meeting by the people best placed to address the topics authoritatively and comprehensively. The first is by John D. Byrum, of the Library of Congress, and Chair of the ISBD Review Group, who clearly and concisely explains the history and role of the ISBDs in "IFLA's ISBD Programme. Purpose, process, and prospects." The next paper, "Brave new FRBR world" is by Patrick Le Boeuf, of the Bibliothèque nationale de France and Chair of the FRBR Review Group (a French version is available an the website). Drawing from his extensive expertise with FRBR, Le Boeuf explains what FRBR is and equally importantly is not, points to its impact in the present context of Code revision, and discusses insights relevant to the working group topics that can be drawn from FRBR. Closing this section is Barbara Tillett's contribution "A Virtual International Authority File," which signals an important change in thinking about international cooperation for bibliographic control. Earlier efforts focussed an getting agreement about form and structure of headings, this view stresses linking authority files to share the intellectual effort yet present headings to the user in the form that is most appropriate culturally.
    The section of background papers starts most appropriately by reprinting the Statement of Principles from the 1961 Paris Conference and continues with another twelve papers of varying lengths, most written specifically for the IME ICC. For the published report the papers have been organized to follow the order of topics assigned to the Tive working groups: Working Group 1 Personal names; WG2 Corporate bodies; WG3 Seriality; WG4 Multivolume/multipart structures; and WG5 Uniform titles, GMDs. Pino Buizza and Mauro Guerrini co-author a substantial paper "Author and title access point control: On the way national bibliographic agencies face the issue forty years after the Paris Principles," which was first presented in Italian at the November 2002 workshop an Cataloguing and Authority Control in Rome. Issues that remain unresolved are which name or title to adopt, which form of the name or title, and which entry word to select, while choice of headings has become more uniform. The impact of catalogue language (meaning both the language of the cataloguing agency and of the majority of users of the catalogue) an these choices is explored by examining the headings used in ten national authority files for a full range of names, personal and corporate. The reflections presented are both practical and grounded in theory. Mauro Guerrini, assisted by Pino Buizza and Lucia Sardo, contributes a further new paper "Corporate bodies from ICCP up to 2003," which is an excellent survey of the surprisingly controversial issue of corporate bodies as authors, starting with Panizzi, Jewett, Cutter, Dziatzko, Fumagalli, and Lubetzky, through the debate at the Paris Conference, to the views of Verona, Domanovszky and Carpenter, and work under the auspices of IFLA an the Form and structure of corporate headings (FSCH) project and its Rvew, as well as a look at the archival standard ISAAR(CPF). This paper is the only one to have a comprehensive bibliography.
    Ton Heijligers reflects an the relation of the IME ICC effort to AACR and calls for an examination of the principles and function of the concept of main entry in his brief paper "Main entry into the future?" Ingrid Parent's article "From ISBD (S) to ISBD(CR): a voyage of discovery and alignment" is reprinted from Serials Librarian as it tells of the successful project not only to revise an ISBD, but also to harmonize three Codes for serials cataloguing: ISBD (CR), ISSN and AACR. Gunilla Jonsson's paper "The bibliographic unit in the digital context" is a perceptive discussion of level of granularity issues which must be addressed in deciding what to catalogue. Practical issues and user expectation are important considerations, whether the material to be catalogued is digital or analog. Ann Huthwaite's paper "Class of materials concept and GMDs" as well as Tom Delsey's ensuing comments, originated as Joint Steering Committee restricted papers in 2002. It is a great service to have them made widely available in this form as they raise fundamental issues and motivate work that has since taken place, leading to the current major round of revision to AACR. The GMD issue is about more than a list of terms and their placement in the cataloguing record, it is intertwined with consideration of whether the concept of classes of materials is helpful in organizing cataloguing rules, if so, which classes are needed, and how to allow for eventual integration of new types of materials. Useful in the Code comparison exercise is an extract of the section an access points from the draft of revised RAK (German cataloguing rules). Four short papers compare aspects of the Russian Cataloguing Rules with RAK and AACR: Tatiana Maskhoulia covers corporate body headings; Elena Zagorskaya outlines current development an serials and other continuing resources; Natalia N. Kasparova covers multilevel structures; Ljubov Ermakova and Tamara Bakhturina describe the uniform title and GMD provisions. The website includes one more item by Kasparova "Bibliographic record language in multilingual electronic communication." The volume is rounded out by the appendix which includes the conference agenda, the full list of participants, and the reports from the five working groups. Not for the casual reader, this volume is a must read for anyone working an cataloguing code development at the national or international levels, as well as those teaching cataloguing. Any practising cataloguer will benefit from reading the draft statement of principles and the three presentation papers, and dipping into the background papers."
  11. Radwanski, A.: Rozwoj formatu MARC (1996) 0.04
    0.035239115 = product of:
      0.07047823 = sum of:
        0.043315165 = weight(_text_:library in 3052) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043315165 = score(doc=3052,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.32867232 = fieldWeight in 3052, 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=3052)
        0.027163066 = product of:
          0.054326132 = sum of:
            0.054326132 = weight(_text_:22 in 3052) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.054326132 = score(doc=3052,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050121464 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3052, 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=3052)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    Discusses the origins of the MARC format and its development connected with the proceedings of the Library of Congress and the British Library. Presents 2 standards: ISO 2709 and ISBD. Focuses on national and international formats elaborated in the 1970s and 1980s, including UNIMARC (1975) and CCF (1984). Outlines the prospects and directions of MARC format development, that is, integration of the format and implementing MARC in the network environment
    Date
    22. 2.1999 20:34:37
  12. El-Sherbini, M.: Metadata and the future of cataloging (2001) 0.04
    0.035239115 = product of:
      0.07047823 = sum of:
        0.043315165 = weight(_text_:library in 751) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043315165 = score(doc=751,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.32867232 = fieldWeight in 751, 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=751)
        0.027163066 = product of:
          0.054326132 = sum of:
            0.054326132 = weight(_text_:22 in 751) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.054326132 = score(doc=751,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050121464 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 751, 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=751)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Date
    23. 1.2007 11:22:30
    Footnote
    Auch in: Library computing 19(2000) nos.3/4, S.180-191
    Source
    Library review. 50(2001) no.1, S.16-27
  13. El-Sherbini, M.A.: Cataloging and classification : review of the literature 2005-06 (2008) 0.04
    0.035239115 = product of:
      0.07047823 = sum of:
        0.043315165 = weight(_text_:library in 249) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043315165 = score(doc=249,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.32867232 = fieldWeight in 249, 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=249)
        0.027163066 = product of:
          0.054326132 = sum of:
            0.054326132 = weight(_text_:22 in 249) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.054326132 = score(doc=249,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050121464 = 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)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    This paper reviews library literature on cataloging and classification published in 2005-06. It covers pertinent literature in the following areas: the future of cataloging; Functional Requirement for Bibliographic Records (FRBR); metadata and its applications and relation to Machine-Readable Cataloging (MARC); cataloging tools and standards; authority control; and recruitment, training, and the changing role of catalogers.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Source
    Library resources and technical services. 52(2008) no.3, S.148-163
  14. Ranta, J.A.: Queens Borough Public Library's Guidelines for cataloging community information (1996) 0.04
    0.03509323 = product of:
      0.07018646 = sum of:
        0.04641878 = weight(_text_:library in 6523) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04641878 = score(doc=6523,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.3522223 = fieldWeight in 6523, 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=6523)
        0.023767682 = product of:
          0.047535364 = sum of:
            0.047535364 = weight(_text_:22 in 6523) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.047535364 = score(doc=6523,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050121464 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 6523, 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=6523)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    Currently, few resources exist to guide libraries in the cataloguing of community information using the new USMARC Format for Cammunity Information (1993). In developing a community information database, Queens Borough Public Library, New York City, formulated their own cataloguing procedures for applying AACR2, LoC File Interpretations, and USMARC Format for Community Information to community information. Their practices include entering corporate names directly whenever possible and assigning LC subject headings for classes of persons and topics, adding neighbourhood level geographic subdivisions. The guidelines were specially designed to aid non cataloguers in cataloguing community information and have enabled library to maintain consistency in handling corporate names and in assigning subject headings, while creating database that is highly accessible to library staff and users
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 22(1996) no.2, S.51-69
  15. Eliot, J.: MARC and OPAC systems : discussion document (1994) 0.04
    0.035046883 = product of:
      0.070093766 = sum of:
        0.030628446 = weight(_text_:library in 10) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030628446 = score(doc=10,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.23240642 = fieldWeight in 10, 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=10)
        0.039465316 = product of:
          0.07893063 = sum of:
            0.07893063 = weight(_text_:project in 10) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07893063 = score(doc=10,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.21156175 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050121464 = queryNorm
                0.37308553 = fieldWeight in 10, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=10)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    A discussion document produced following a meeting the Users of Book Industry Standards (UBIS) Bibliographic Standards Working Group at the University of London as part of a project to consider the Survey on the use of UK-MARC by Russell Sweeney published in 1991 by the British Library National Bibliographic Service. Considers the suitability, or otherwise, of the UKMARC format for use in OPACs. Summarizes the issues involved, discussing: the UKMARC exchange format, tagging and coding structure (record complexity, analytical entries, non filing indicators), data content (statements of responsibility, main versus added entry) and records standards
  16. Williams, R.D.: MARC: thirty years and still going ... (1995) 0.04
    0.035046883 = product of:
      0.070093766 = sum of:
        0.030628446 = weight(_text_:library in 4020) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030628446 = score(doc=4020,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.23240642 = fieldWeight in 4020, 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=4020)
        0.039465316 = product of:
          0.07893063 = sum of:
            0.07893063 = weight(_text_:project in 4020) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.07893063 = score(doc=4020,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.21156175 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050121464 = queryNorm
                0.37308553 = fieldWeight in 4020, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4020)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    Traces the history of the MARC formats, for computerized bibliographic records and computerized cataloguing, from the initial work of the Library of Congress in the early 60s through to the various stages of development of the MARC Pilot Project (1966 to 1968); MARC2 (1968 to 1974); Distribution Service (1968); Retrospective Conversion (1968 to 1970); the Committee on Representation in Machine-Readable Form of Bibliographic Information (MARBI) and the USMARC Advisory Group; and the expansion, linkage and integration stages (1980 to the present)
  17. Manguinhas, H.; Freire, N.; Machado, J.; Borbinha, J.: Supporting multilingual bibliographic resource discovery with Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (2012) 0.03
    0.033873826 = product of:
      0.06774765 = sum of:
        0.043081827 = weight(_text_:digital in 133) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.043081827 = score(doc=133,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.21790776 = fieldWeight in 133, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=133)
        0.024665821 = product of:
          0.049331643 = sum of:
            0.049331643 = weight(_text_:project in 133) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.049331643 = score(doc=133,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.21156175 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050121464 = queryNorm
                0.23317845 = fieldWeight in 133, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=133)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    This paper describes an experiment exploring the hypothesis that innovative application of the Functional Require-ments for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) principles can complement traditional bibliographic resource discovery systems in order to improve the user experience. A specialized service was implemented that, when given a plain list of results from a regular online catalogue, was able to process, enrich and present that list in a more relevant way for the user. This service pre-processes the records of a traditional online catalogue in order to build a semantic structure following the FRBR model. The service also explores web search features that have been revolutionizing the way users conceptualize resource discovery, such as relevance ranking and metasearching. This work was developed in the context of the TELPlus project. We processed nearly one hundred thousand bibliographic and authority records, in multiple languages, and originating from twelve European na-tional libraries. This paper describes the architecture of the service and the main challenges faced, especially concerning the extraction and linking of the relevant FRBR entities from the bibliographic metadata produced by the libraries. The service was evaluated by end users, who filled out a questionnaire after using a traditional online catalogue and the new service, both with the same bibliographic collection. The analysis of the results supports the hypothesis that FRBR can be implemented for re-source discovery in a non-intrusive way, reusing the data of any existing traditional bibliographic system.
    Content
    Beitrag eines Schwerpunktthemas: Semantic Web and Reasoning for Cultural Heritage and Digital Libraries: Vgl.: http://www.semantic-web-journal.net/content/supporting-multilingual-bibliographic-resource-discovery-functional-requirements-bibliograph http://www.semantic-web-journal.net/sites/default/files/swj145_2.pdf.
  18. Tell, B.: On MARC and natural text searching : a review of Pauline Cochrane's inspirational thinking grafted onto a Swedish spy on library matters (2000) 0.03
    0.033157483 = product of:
      0.066314965 = sum of:
        0.045942668 = weight(_text_:library in 1183) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.045942668 = score(doc=1183,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.34860963 = fieldWeight in 1183, 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=1183)
        0.0203723 = product of:
          0.0407446 = sum of:
            0.0407446 = weight(_text_:22 in 1183) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0407446 = score(doc=1183,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050121464 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1183, 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=1183)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    The following discussion is in appreciation of the invaluable inspirations Pauline Cochrane, by her acumen and perspicacity, has implanted into my thinking regarding various applications of library and information science, especially those involving machine-readable records and subject categorization. It is indeed an honor for me at my age to be offered to contribute to Pauline's Festschrift when instead I should be concerned about my forthcoming obituary. In the following, I must give some Background to what formed my thinking before my involvement in the field and thus before I encountered Pauline.
    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
  19. MacCallum, S.H.: Harmonization of USMARC, CANMARC, and UKMARC (2000) 0.03
    0.031933483 = product of:
      0.063866965 = sum of:
        0.046890046 = weight(_text_:library in 185) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.046890046 = score(doc=185,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.35579824 = fieldWeight in 185, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=185)
        0.016976917 = product of:
          0.033953834 = sum of:
            0.033953834 = weight(_text_:22 in 185) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.033953834 = score(doc=185,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050121464 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 185, 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=185)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    The Library of Congress, the National Library of Canada, and the British Library began discussing the harmonization of their respective MARC formats in 1994. The differences between USMARC and CAN/MARC were primarily in details rather than general specifications. Changes were made to CAN/MARC that eliminated many of the differences between CAN/MARC and the other two formats (USMARC and UKMARC). In addition, changes in USMARC that aligned USMARC and CAN/MARC were approved in 1997. The nature of the differences between UKMARC and CAN/MARC has necessitated a different process of harmonization. The differences between these two formats are many in extent, details, and approach to some requirements. Although total harmonization of USMARC-CAN/MARC with UKMARC is not feasible at this time, the British Library's program to add USMARC-CAN/MARC fields to UKMARC has increased the congruency of these formats. The National Library of Canada and the Library of Congress have begun to work on joint maintenance procedures and plan to have joint documentation.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Source
    Library resources and technical services. 44(2000) no.3, S.135-140
  20. Boehr, D.L.; Bushman, B.: Preparing for the future : National Library of Medicine's® project to add MeSH® RDF URIs to its bibliographic and authority records (2018) 0.03
    0.03104268 = product of:
      0.06208536 = sum of:
        0.032486375 = weight(_text_:library in 5173) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.032486375 = score(doc=5173,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.24650425 = fieldWeight in 5173, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5173)
        0.029598987 = product of:
          0.059197973 = sum of:
            0.059197973 = weight(_text_:project in 5173) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.059197973 = score(doc=5173,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.21156175 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050121464 = queryNorm
                0.27981415 = fieldWeight in 5173, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5173)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    Although it is not yet known for certain what will replace MARC, eventually bibliographic data will need to be transformed to move into a linked data environment. This article discusses why the National Library of Medicine chose to add Uniform Resource Identifiers for Medical Subject Headings as our starting point and details the process by which they were added to the MeSH MARC authority records, the legacy bibliographic records, and the records for newly cataloged items. The article outlines the various enhancement methods available, decisions made, and the rationale for the selected method.

Authors

Years

Languages

Types

  • a 155
  • m 10
  • s 9
  • el 8
  • l 4
  • ? 2
  • b 2
  • r 2
  • x 1
  • More… Less…