Search (301 results, page 1 of 16)

  • × theme_ss:"Formalerschließung"
  • × year_i:[2000 TO 2010}
  1. Ma, Y.-L.; Liu, W.: Digital resources and metadata application in Shanghai Library (2003) 0.19 
    0.18620901 = product of:
  0.24827868 = sum of:
    0.13486744 = weight(_text_:digital in 5506) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.13486744 = score(doc=5506,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.6821592 = fieldWeight in 5506, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5506)
    0.053599782 = weight(_text_:library in 5506) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.053599782 = score(doc=5506,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.40671125 = fieldWeight in 5506, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5506)
    0.059811447 = product of:
      0.11962289 = sum of:
        0.11962289 = weight(_text_:project in 5506) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11962289 = score(doc=5506,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.21156175 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.5654278 = fieldWeight in 5506, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5506)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)
    Abstract
    The Shanghai Digital Library (SDL) is a component of the China Digital Library Project. This paper introduces the framework, goals, and contents of the China Digital Library Project. The vision, mission, system architecture, digital resources, and related major technology of the SDL project are discussed. Also, the background of the Chinese metadata application and the metadata scheme of the SDL are described, and the features of metadata application in practical cases are analyzed. Finally, current issues of metadata application and their solutions are suggested.
  2. Aalberg, T.; Haugen, F.B.; Husby, O.: ¬A Tool for Converting from MARC to FRBR (2006) 0.15 
    0.15278558 = product of:
  0.20371412 = sum of:
    0.060314562 = weight(_text_:digital in 2425) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.060314562 = score(doc=2425,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.30507088 = fieldWeight in 2425, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2425)
    0.026799891 = weight(_text_:library in 2425) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026799891 = score(doc=2425,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.20335563 = fieldWeight in 2425, 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=2425)
    0.116599664 = sum of:
      0.069064304 = weight(_text_:project in 2425) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.069064304 = score(doc=2425,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.21156175 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050121464 = queryNorm
          0.32644984 = fieldWeight in 2425, 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=2425)
      0.047535364 = weight(_text_:22 in 2425) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.047535364 = score(doc=2425,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050121464 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2425, 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=2425)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)
    Abstract
    The FRBR model is by many considered to be an important contribution to the next generation of bibliographic catalogues, but a major challenge for the library community is how to use this model on already existing MARC-based bibliographic catalogues. This problem requires a solution for the interpretation and conversion of MARC records, and a tool for this kind of conversion is developed as a part of the Norwegian BIBSYS FRBR project. The tool is based on a systematic approach to the interpretation and conversion process and is designed to be adaptable to the rules applied in different catalogues.
    Source
    Research and advanced technology for digital libraries : 10th European conference, proceedings / ECDL 2006, Alicante, Spain, September 17 - 22, 2006
  3. Nero, L.M.: Cataloguing digital resources : the experience of the University of the West Indies, St Augustine Campus (2005) 0.12 
    0.121701725 = product of:
  0.16226897 = sum of:
    0.073112294 = weight(_text_:digital in 3118) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.073112294 = score(doc=3118,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.36980176 = fieldWeight in 3118, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3118)
    0.022971334 = weight(_text_:library in 3118) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022971334 = score(doc=3118,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.17430481 = fieldWeight in 3118, 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=3118)
    0.06618535 = product of:
      0.1323707 = sum of:
        0.1323707 = weight(_text_:project in 3118) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1323707 = score(doc=3118,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.21156175 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.6256835 = fieldWeight in 3118, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3118)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)
    Abstract
    Purpose - The objective is to describe the cataloguing component of a digitization project conducted by the University of the West Indies, St Augustine campus. Design/methodology/approach - The paper presents a case study review of the planning and implementation phases of this project. Findings - The account demonstrates that planning and continuous assessments are necessary elements for successful project completion. Research limitations/implications - The paper highlights the need to adapt planning guidelines to fit a specific environment. Practical implications - The paper puts forward a model for managing the cataloguing aspect of a digitization project. It also provides MARC 21 fields that can be used in coding digital records. Originality/value - The paper emphasizes the value of team work, planning and assessment for managing cataloguing project.
    Source
    Library review. 54(2005) no.2, S.100-107
  4. Albertsen, K.; Nuys, C. van: Paradigma: FRBR and digital documents (2004) 0.12 
    0.120700054 = product of:
  0.1609334 = sum of:
    0.085297674 = weight(_text_:digital in 4182) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.085297674 = score(doc=4182,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.43143538 = fieldWeight in 4182, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4182)
    0.026799891 = weight(_text_:library in 4182) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026799891 = score(doc=4182,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.20335563 = fieldWeight in 4182, 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=4182)
    0.048835836 = product of:
      0.09767167 = sum of:
        0.09767167 = weight(_text_:project in 4182) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09767167 = score(doc=4182,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.21156175 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.4616698 = fieldWeight in 4182, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4182)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)
    Abstract
    This paper describes the Paradigma Project at the National Library of Norway and its work to ensure the legal deposit of all types of digital documents. The Paradigma project plans to implement extensions to IFLA's FRBR model for handling composite Group 1 entities at all abstraction levels. A new taxonomy is introduced: This is done by forming various relationships into component aggregates, and grouping these aggregates into various classes. This serves two main purposes: New applications may be introduced without requiring modifications to the model, and automated mechanisms may be designed to handle each class in a common way, largely unaffected by the details of the relationship semantics.
  5. Azevedo Lourenço, C. de; Alvarenga, L.: Metadata standard of theses and dissertations according to the entity-relationship model (2009) 0.11 
    0.10687411 = product of:
  0.1424988 = sum of:
    0.073112294 = weight(_text_:digital in 3078) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.073112294 = score(doc=3078,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.36980176 = fieldWeight in 3078, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3078)
    0.039787523 = weight(_text_:library in 3078) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.039787523 = score(doc=3078,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.30190483 = fieldWeight in 3078, 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=3078)
    0.029598987 = product of:
      0.059197973 = sum of:
        0.059197973 = weight(_text_:project in 3078) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.059197973 = score(doc=3078,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21156175 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.27981415 = fieldWeight in 3078, 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=3078)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)
    Abstract
    With the automation of information systems and with the advent of digital libraries, norms, standards and techniques of library studies have been widely discussed, analyzed, reevaluated and reorganized. In this article the results of doctoral research, in which the Brazilian Metadata Standard for Theses and Dissertations (MTD-BR) was analyzed, is presented. This standard has been utilized in the digital Library of Theses and Dissertations Project, of the Instituto Brasileiro de Informação em Ciência e Tecnologia, IBICT (Brazilian Institute for Scientific and Technological Information), with the methodology of data modeling, according to the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR), which is based on the Entity- Relationship Model. It was concluded that new studies should be carried out applying this methodology to other metadata standards, even if they are analyzed with other data modeling tools, such as the object-oriented model, and considering its relationship with the guidelines, principles and instruments of library studies.
  6. Park, J.-r.; Lu, C.; Marion, L.: Cataloging professionals in the digital environment : a content analysis of job descriptions (2009) 0.11 
    0.10680193 = product of:
  0.14240257 = sum of:
    0.0895439 = weight(_text_:digital in 2766) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0895439 = score(doc=2766,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.4529128 = fieldWeight in 2766, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2766)
    0.032486375 = weight(_text_:library in 2766) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.032486375 = score(doc=2766,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.24650425 = fieldWeight in 2766, 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=2766)
    0.0203723 = product of:
      0.0407446 = sum of:
        0.0407446 = weight(_text_:22 in 2766) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0407446 = score(doc=2766,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2766, 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=2766)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)
    Abstract
    This study assesses the current state of responsibilities and skill sets required of cataloging professionals. It identifies emerging roles and competencies focusing on the digital environment and relates these to the established knowledge of traditional cataloging standards and practices. We conducted a content analysis of 349 job descriptions advertised in AutoCAT in 2005-2006. Multivariate techniques of cluster and multidimensional-scaling analyses were applied to the data. Analysis of job titles, required and preferred qualifications/skills, and responsibilities lends perspective to the roles that cataloging professionals play in the digital environment. Technological advances increasingly demand knowledge and skills related to electronic resource management, metadata creation, and computer and Web applications. Emerging knowledge and skill sets are increasingly being integrated into the core technical aspects of cataloging such as bibliographic and authority control and integrated library-system management. Management of cataloging functions is also in high demand. The results of the study provide insight on current and future curriculum design of library and information-science programs.
    Date
    22. 3.2009 19:20:24
  7. Hill, J.S.: Analog people for digital dreams : staffing and educational considerations for cataloging and metadata professionals (2005) 0.10 
    0.104556866 = product of:
  0.13940915 = sum of:
    0.068930924 = weight(_text_:digital in 126) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.068930924 = score(doc=126,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.34865242 = fieldWeight in 126, 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=126)
    0.043315165 = weight(_text_:library in 126) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.043315165 = score(doc=126,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.32867232 = fieldWeight in 126, 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=126)
    0.027163066 = product of:
      0.054326132 = sum of:
        0.054326132 = weight(_text_:22 in 126) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.054326132 = score(doc=126,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 126, 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=126)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)
    Abstract
    As libraries attempt to incorporate increasing amounts of electronic resources into their catalogs, utilizing a growing variety of metadata standards, library and information science programs are grappling with how to educate catalogers to meet these challenges. In this paper, an employer considers the characteristics and skills that catalogers will need and how they might acquire them.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Source
    Library resources and technical services. 49(2005) no.1, S.14-18
  8. Madison, O.M.A.: Utilizing the FRBR framework in designing user-focused digital content and access systems (2006) 0.10 
    0.104556866 = product of:
  0.13940915 = sum of:
    0.068930924 = weight(_text_:digital in 1085) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.068930924 = score(doc=1085,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.34865242 = fieldWeight in 1085, 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=1085)
    0.043315165 = weight(_text_:library in 1085) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.043315165 = score(doc=1085,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.32867232 = fieldWeight in 1085, 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=1085)
    0.027163066 = product of:
      0.054326132 = sum of:
        0.054326132 = weight(_text_:22 in 1085) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.054326132 = score(doc=1085,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1085, 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=1085)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)
    Abstract
    This paper discusses the rapidly expanding environment of emerging electronic content and the importance of librarians to partner with new research and teaching communities in meeting users' needs to find, identify, select, and obtain the information and resources they need. The methodology and framework of the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions' Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records could serve as a useful tool in building expanded access and content systems.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Source
    Library resources and technical services. 50(2006) no.1, S.10-15
  9. Intner, S.S.; Lazinger, S.S.; Weihs, J.: Metadata and its impact on libraries (2005) 0.10 
    0.09860925 = product of:
  0.131479 = sum of:
    0.08787003 = weight(_text_:digital in 339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08787003 = score(doc=339,freq=52.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.44444638 = fieldWeight in 339, product of:
          7.2111025 = tf(freq=52.0), with freq of:
            52.0 = termFreq=52.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=339)
    0.029655868 = weight(_text_:library in 339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029655868 = score(doc=339,freq=30.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.22502656 = fieldWeight in 339, product of:
          5.477226 = tf(freq=30.0), with freq of:
            30.0 = termFreq=30.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=339)
    0.013953096 = product of:
      0.027906192 = sum of:
        0.027906192 = weight(_text_:project in 339) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.027906192 = score(doc=339,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.21156175 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.13190566 = fieldWeight in 339, 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=339)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)
    Content
    What is metadata? - Metadata schemas & their relationships to particular communities - Library and information-related metadata schemas - Creating library metadata for monographic materials - Creating library metadata for continuing materials - Integrating library metadata into local cataloging and bibliographic - databases - Digital collections/digital libraries - Archiving & preserving digital materials - Impact of digital resources on library services - Future possibilities
    Footnote
    Rez. in: JASIST. 58(2007) no.6., S.909-910 (A.D. Petrou): "A division in metadata definitions for physical objects vs. those for digital resources offered in Chapter 1 is punctuated by the use of broader, more inclusive metadata definitions, such as data about data as well as with the inclusion of more specific metadata definitions intended for networked resources. Intertwined with the book's subject matter, which is to "distinguish traditional cataloguing from metadata activity" (5), the authors' chosen metadata definition is also detailed on page 5 as follows: Thus while granting the validity of the inclusive definition, we concentrate primarily on metadata as it is most commonly thought of both inside and outside of the library community, as "structured information used to find, access, use and manage information resources primarily in a digital environment." (International Encyclopedia of Information and Library Science, 2003) Metadata principles discussed by the authors include modularity, extensibility, refinement and multilingualism. The latter set is followed by seven misconceptions about metadata. Two types of metadata discussed are automatically generated indexes and manually created records. In terms of categories of metadata, the authors present three sets of them as follows: descriptive, structural, and administrative metadata. Chapter 2 focuses on metadata for communities of practice, and is a prelude to content in Chapter 3 where metadata applications, use, and development are presented from the perspective of libraries. Chapter 2 discusses the emergence and impact of metadata on organization and access of online resources from the perspective of communities for which such standards exist and for the need for mapping one standard to another. Discussion focuses on metalanguages, such as Standard Generalized Markup Language (SGML) and eXtensible Markup Language (XML), "capable of embedding descriptive elements within the document markup itself' (25). This discussion falls under syntactic interoperability. For semantic interoperability, HTML and other mark-up languages, such as Text Encoding Initiative (TEI) and Computer Interchange of Museum Information (CIMI), are covered. For structural interoperability, Dublin Core's 15 metadata elements are grouped into three areas: content (title, subject, description, type, source, relation, and coverage), intellectual property (creator, publisher, contributor and rights), and instantiation (date, format, identifier, and language) for discussion.
    Other selected specialized metadata element sets or schemas, such as Government Information Locator Service (GILS), are presented. Attention is brought to the different sets of elements and the need for linking up these elements across metadata schemes from a semantic point of view. It is no surprise, then, that after the presentation of additional specialized sets of metadata from the educational community and the arts sector, attention is turned to the discussion of Crosswalks between metadata element sets or the mapping of one metadata standard to another. Finally, the five appendices detailing elements found in Dublin Core, GILS, ARIADNE versions 3 and 3. 1, and Categories for the Description of Works of Art are an excellent addition to this chapter's focus on metadata and communities of practice. Chapters 3-6 provide an up-to-date account of the use of metadata standards in Libraries from the point of view of a community of practice. Some of the content standards included in these four chapters are AACR2, Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC), and Library of Congress Subject Classification. In addition, uses of MARC along with planned implementations of the archival community's encoding scheme, EAD, are covered in detail. In a way, content in these chapters can be considered as a refresher course on the history, current state, importance, and usefulness of the above-mentioned standards in Libraries. Application of the standards is offered for various types of materials, such as monographic materials, continuing resources, and integrating library metadata into local catalogs and databases. A review of current digital library projects takes place in Chapter 7. While details about these projects tend to become out of date fast, the sections on issues and problems encountered in digital projects and successes and failures deserve any reader's close inspection. A suggested model is important enough to merit a specific mention below, in a short list format, as it encapsulates lessons learned from issues, problems, successes, and failures in digital projects. Before detailing the model, however, the various projects included in Chapter 7 should be mentioned. The projects are: Colorado Digitization Project, Cooperative Online Resource Catalog (an Office of Research project by OCLC, Inc.), California Digital Library, JSTOR, LC's National Digital Library Program and VARIATIONS.
    Chapter 8 discusses issues of archiving and preserving digital materials. The chapter reiterates, "What is the point of all of this if the resources identified and catalogued are not preserved?" (Gorman, 2003, p. 16). Discussion about preservation and related issues is organized in five sections that successively ask why, what, who, how, and how much of the plethora of digital materials should be archived and preserved. These are not easy questions because of media instability and technological obsolescence. Stakeholders in communities with diverse interests compete in terms of which community or representative of a community has an authoritative say in what and how much get archived and preserved. In discussing the above-mentioned questions, the authors once again provide valuable information and lessons from a number of initiatives in Europe, Australia, and from other global initiatives. The Draft Charter on the Preservation of the Digital Heritage and the Guidelines for the Preservation of Digital Heritage, both published by UNESCO, are discussed and some of the preservation principles from the Guidelines are listed. The existing diversity in administrative arrangements for these new projects and resources notwithstanding, the impact on content produced for online reserves through work done in digital projects and from the use of metadata and the impact on levels of reference services and the ensuing need for different models to train users and staff is undeniable. In terms of education and training, formal coursework, continuing education, and informal and on-the-job training are just some of the available options. The intensity in resources required for cataloguing digital materials, the questions over the quality of digital resources, and the threat of the new digital environment to the survival of the traditional library are all issues quoted by critics and others, however, who are concerned about a balance for planning and resources allocated for traditional or print-based resources and newer digital resources. A number of questions are asked as part of the book's conclusions in Chapter 10. Of these questions, one that touches on all of the rest and upon much of the book's content is the question: What does the future hold for metadata in libraries? Metadata standards are alive and well in many communities of practice, as Chapters 2-6 have demonstrated. The usefulness of metadata continues to be high and innovation in various elements should keep information professionals engaged for decades to come. There is no doubt that metadata have had a tremendous impact in how we organize information for access and in terms of who, how, when, and where contact is made with library services and collections online. Planning and commitment to a diversity of metadata to serve the plethora of needs in communities of practice are paramount for the continued success of many digital projects and for online preservation of our digital heritage."
    LCSH
    Digital preservation
    Digital libraries
    Series
    Library and information science text series
    Subject
    Digital preservation
    Digital libraries
  10. Marcum, D.B.: ¬The future of cataloging (2006) 0.10 
    0.09787576 = product of:
  0.13050102 = sum of:
    0.060314562 = weight(_text_:digital in 114) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.060314562 = score(doc=114,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.30507088 = fieldWeight in 114, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=114)
    0.04641878 = weight(_text_:library in 114) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04641878 = score(doc=114,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.3522223 = fieldWeight in 114, 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=114)
    0.023767682 = product of:
      0.047535364 = sum of:
        0.047535364 = weight(_text_:22 in 114) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.047535364 = score(doc=114,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 114, 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=114)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)
    Abstract
    This paper explores cataloging in the Age of Google. It considers what the technologies now being adopted mean for cataloging in the future. The author begins by exploring how digital-era students do research-they find using Google easier than using libraries. Mass digitization projects now are bringing into question the role that library cataloging has traditionally performed. The author asks readers to consider if the detailed attention librarians have been paying to descriptive cataloging can still be justified, and if cost-effective means for access should be considered.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Footnote
    Vgl. auch: http://www.loc.gov/library/reports/CatalogingSpeech.pdf.
    Source
    Library resources and technical services. 50(2006) no.1, S.xx-xx
  11. Babeu, A.: Building a "FRBR-inspired" catalog : the Perseus digital library experience (2008) 0.09 
    0.088672936 = product of:
  0.11823058 = sum of:
    0.059695937 = weight(_text_:digital in 2429) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.059695937 = score(doc=2429,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.30194187 = fieldWeight in 2429, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2429)
    0.030628446 = weight(_text_:library in 2429) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030628446 = score(doc=2429,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.23240642 = fieldWeight in 2429, 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=2429)
    0.027906192 = product of:
      0.055812385 = sum of:
        0.055812385 = weight(_text_:project in 2429) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.055812385 = score(doc=2429,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.21156175 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.26381132 = fieldWeight in 2429, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2429)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)
    Abstract
    If one follows any of the major cataloging or library blogs these days, it is obvious that the topic of FRBR (Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records) has increasingly become one of major significance for the library community. What began as a proposed conceptual entity-relationship model for improving the structure of bibliographic records has become a hotly debated topic with many tangled threads that have implications not just for cataloging but for many aspects of libraries and librarianship. In the fall of 2005, the Perseus Project experimented with creating a FRBRized catalog for its current online classics collection, a collection that consists of several hundred classical texts in Greek and Latin as well as reference works and scholarly commentaries regarding these works. In the last two years, with funding from the Mellon Foundation, Perseus has amassed and digitized a growing collection of classical texts (some as image books on our own servers that will eventually be made available through Fedora), and some available through the Open Content Alliance (OCA)2, and created FRBRized cataloging data for these texts. This work was done largely as an experiment to see the potential of the FRBR model for creating a specialized catalog for classics.
    Our catalog should not be called a FRBR catalog perhaps, but instead a "FRBR Inspired catalog." As such our main goal has been "practical findability," we are seeking to support the four identified user tasks of the FRBR model, or to "Search, Identify, Select, and Obtain," rather than to create a FRBR catalog, per se. By encoding as much information as possible in the MODS and MADS records we have created, we believe that useful searching will be supported, that by using unique identifiers for works and authors users will be able to identify that the entity they have located is the desired one, that by encoding expression level information (such as the language of the work, the translator, etc) users will be able to select which expression of a work they are interested in, and that by supplying links to different online manifestations that users will be able to obtain access to a digital copy of a work. This white paper will discuss previous and current efforts by the Perseus Project in creating a FRBRized catalog, including the cataloging workflow, lessons learned during the process and will also seek to place this work in the larger context of research regarding FRBR, cataloging, Library 2.0 and the Semantic Web, and the growing importance of the FRBR model in the face of growing million book digital libraries.
  12. Dunsire, G.: Integrating Dublin Core / RDF records with MARC21 via the OCLC Connexion service at the Centre for Digital Library Research (2003) 0.08 
    0.077694096 = product of:
  0.15538819 = sum of:
    0.11560067 = weight(_text_:digital in 1497) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11560067 = score(doc=1497,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.58470786 = fieldWeight in 1497, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1497)
    0.039787523 = weight(_text_:library in 1497) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.039787523 = score(doc=1497,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.30190483 = fieldWeight in 1497, 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=1497)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    This paper discusses the use of OCLC's Connexion service (formerly CORC) by the Centre for Digital Library Research at the University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, Scotland. The Centre has completed, and is currently engaged in, a number of research projects involving the application of Dublin Core and MARC21 in creating metadata for digital resources; these include projects an the Glasgow Digital Library, East Dunbartonshire local history, and a pilot Scottish Cultural Portal.The Connexion service provides a MARC21-DC converter, and the Centre has been investigating its incorporation in workflows for creating and maintaining digital libraries. This has included the use of databases to store metadata, with subsequent output to Dublin Core and conversion to MARC21.
  13. Beacom, M.: Crossing a digital divide : AACR2 and unaddressed problems of networked ressources (2000) 0.07 
    0.07466953 = product of:
  0.14933906 = sum of:
    0.10339639 = weight(_text_:digital in 6805) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10339639 = score(doc=6805,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.52297866 = fieldWeight in 6805, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6805)
    0.045942668 = weight(_text_:library in 6805) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.045942668 = score(doc=6805,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.34860963 = fieldWeight in 6805, 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=6805)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Footnote
    Paper for the conference 'Bibliographic control for the new millennium' held in Washington, DC at the Library of Congress, November 2000
  14. Copeland, A.: Works and digital resources in the catalog : electronic versions of Book of Urizen, The Kelmscott Chaucer and Robinson Crusoe (2002) 0.07 
    0.07371451 = product of:
  0.14742902 = sum of:
    0.120629124 = weight(_text_:digital in 5620) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.120629124 = score(doc=5620,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.61014175 = fieldWeight in 5620, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5620)
    0.026799891 = weight(_text_:library in 5620) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026799891 = score(doc=5620,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.20335563 = fieldWeight in 5620, 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=5620)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Content
    The author addresses issues regarding the cataloging of digital manifestations of works. The problem of how to catalog digitized rare books and electronic texts to facilitate access to works while distinguishing editions is discussed. Using digital versions of Blake's Book of Urizen, The Kelmscott Chaucer and Robinson Crusoe as examples, the article focuses on the way current cataloging aids or hinders access to works. Specific problems include: the non-uniform use of uniform titles; varying application of the Library of Congress Rule Interpretation (1.11A) concerning electronic reproductions; the lack of analysis at the work level in digital projects.
  15. Münnich, M.: REUSE or rule harmonization : just a project? (2000) 0.07 
    0.0684378 = product of:
  0.1368756 = sum of:
    0.033156272 = weight(_text_:library in 192) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033156272 = score(doc=192,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.25158736 = fieldWeight in 192, 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=192)
    0.103719324 = sum of:
      0.069765486 = weight(_text_:project in 192) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.069765486 = score(doc=192,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.21156175 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050121464 = queryNorm
          0.32976416 = fieldWeight in 192, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=192)
      0.033953834 = weight(_text_:22 in 192) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.033953834 = score(doc=192,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050121464 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 192, 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=192)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    German academic libraries acquire a large number of books from British and American publishers. The bibliographic records of the Library of Congress and the British National Bibliography are offered in most German library networks. Thus, projects REUSE and REUSE+ were undertaken when there was a demand for harmonization of Germany cataloging rules with AACR2 (Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules). Experts in the United States and Germany systematically analyzed bibliographic data and compared the codes on which the data were based. Major and minor differences in cataloging rules were identified. The REUSE group proposed German participation in international authority files and changes in RAK, the German cataloging rules. In REUSE+ the different types of hierarchical bibliographic structures in USMARC and MAB2 and other German formats were analyzed. The German project group made suggestions concerning both the German formats and the USMARC format. Steps toward rule alignment and harmonization of online requirements were made when the German Cataloging Rules Conference made decisions on resolutions prepared by the Working Groups on Descriptive Cataloging that dealt with titles, encoding of form titles and conference terms, prefixes in names, hierarchies, entries under persons and corporate bodies, and the conceptual basis of RAK2 in the context of harmonization. Although problems remain, German rule makers have made progress toward internationality.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Source
    Library resources and technical services. 44(2000) no.3, S.122-128
  16. Humphrey, J.: Manuscripts and metadata : Descriptive metadata in three manuscript catalogs: DigCIM, MALVINE, & Digital Scriptorium (2007) 0.07 
    0.06649769 = product of:
  0.13299538 = sum of:
    0.10339639 = weight(_text_:digital in 783) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10339639 = score(doc=783,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.52297866 = fieldWeight in 783, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=783)
    0.029598987 = product of:
      0.059197973 = sum of:
        0.059197973 = weight(_text_:project in 783) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.059197973 = score(doc=783,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.21156175 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.27981415 = fieldWeight in 783, 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=783)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    The complexity of cataloging manuscripts, particularly medieval manuscripts, has meant that these materials have remained largely inaccessible to the public. The quantity and quality of the descriptive data, the time and money it takes to catalog manuscripts, and the fragility of the materials themselves explain the dearth of searchable data on these valuable resources. Even when manuscripts have been cataloged, they have often been physically available only to a few elite scholars who are able to gain access to them. Certain institutions have embarked on projects to reverse this situation. This paper deals with three of these projects: the British Library's Digital Catalogue of Illuminated Manuscripts (DigCIM), a European consortium's database entitled Manuscripts And Letters Via Integrated Networks in Europe (MALVINE), and Columbia University's Digital Scriptorium (DS). The author explores the history of each project, compares the metadata utilized by each one through the creation of a crosswalk, and analyzes the usefulness of these catalogs to the user.
    Object
    Digital Scriptorium
  17. Huthwaite, A.: AACR2 and its place in the digital world : near-term solutions and long-term direction (2000) 0.06 
    0.062224608 = product of:
  0.124449216 = sum of:
    0.086163655 = weight(_text_:digital in 6806) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.086163655 = score(doc=6806,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.4358155 = fieldWeight in 6806, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=6806)
    0.03828556 = weight(_text_:library in 6806) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03828556 = score(doc=6806,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.29050803 = fieldWeight in 6806, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=6806)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Footnote
    Paper for the conference 'Bibliographic control for the new millennium' held in Washington, DC at the Library of Congress, November 2000
  18. Tillett, B.B.: Authority control at the international level (2000) 0.06 
    0.06143105 = product of:
  0.1228621 = sum of:
    0.01914278 = weight(_text_:library in 191) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01914278 = score(doc=191,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.14525402 = fieldWeight in 191, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=191)
    0.103719324 = sum of:
      0.069765486 = weight(_text_:project in 191) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.069765486 = score(doc=191,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.21156175 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050121464 = queryNorm
          0.32976416 = fieldWeight in 191, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=191)
      0.033953834 = weight(_text_:22 in 191) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.033953834 = score(doc=191,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.050121464 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 191, 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=191)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    International efforts to provide authority control include the work of IFLA, the AUTHOR Project funded by the European Commission, and related work conducted under the auspices of the ICA/CDS. IFLA developed the guidelines Form and Structure of Corporate Headings, documented the formulation of names along the lines of national origin in its publication Names of Persons, and published Guidelines for Authority and Reference Entries. Attention has shifted from a single authority record for each entity that would be shared internationally through the exchange of records to linking parallel authority records for the same entity. The access control of the future will account for difference in cataloging rules, transliteration standards, and cultural differences within the same language as well as for the need for different languages and scripts and will enable users to display the script and form of a heading that they expect. Project AUTHOR is a shared set of resource national authority files that used selections from the authority files of France, the United Kingdom, Spain, Portugal, and Belgium. The prototype tested an adaptation of Z39.50 server software for authority records and displays for user interface. An international standard for authority control records has been developed for corporate bodies, persons, and families. Through joint meetings efforts have been synchronized to develop authority control at the international level.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Source
    Library resources and technical services. 44(2000) no.3, S.168-172
  19. Ahmed, S.S.: ¬A study of cataloging department Websites of the Arabian Gulf Libraries (2004/05) 0.06 
    0.06012047 = product of:
  0.12024094 = sum of:
    0.060314562 = weight(_text_:digital in 730) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.060314562 = score(doc=730,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.30507088 = fieldWeight in 730, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=730)
    0.059926376 = weight(_text_:library in 730) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.059926376 = score(doc=730,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.45471698 = fieldWeight in 730, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=730)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)
    Abstract
    Many libraries in the US provide information about their cataloging department homepages as segments of their technical services homepages. However, in case of the Arabian Gulf university libraries, all the library Websites focus on general collections and services available to their patrons and there is a lack of information on various departments within the library. Very few library Websites have information about the cataloging departments. Only the King Fand University of Petroleum and Minerals (KFUPM) library Website provides a separate Website for its Cataloging Operations Division. The study also found that the exploitation of Web-based cataloging resources by catalogers of the KFUPM library has resulted in enhancing the quality and efficiency of cataloging work.
    Footnote
    Beitrag eines Themenheftes "Profiles in digital information"
  20. Mönch, C.; Aalberg, T.: Automatic conversion from MARC to FRBR (2003) 0.06 
    0.059401147 = product of:
  0.07920153 = sum of:
    0.043081827 = weight(_text_:digital in 2422) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.043081827 = score(doc=2422,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.21790776 = fieldWeight in 2422, 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=2422)
    0.01914278 = weight(_text_:library in 2422) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01914278 = score(doc=2422,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.14525402 = fieldWeight in 2422, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2422)
    0.016976917 = product of:
      0.033953834 = sum of:
        0.033953834 = weight(_text_:22 in 2422) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.033953834 = score(doc=2422,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2422, 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=2422)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.75 = coord(3/4)
    Abstract
    Catalogs have for centuries been the main tool that enabled users to search for items in a library by author, title, or subject. A catalog can be interpreted as a set of bibliographic records, where each record acts as a surrogate for a publication. Every record describes a specific publication and contains the data that is used to create the indexes of search systems and the information that is presented to the user. Bibliographic records are often captured and exchanged by the use of the MARC format. Although there are numerous rdquodialectsrdquo of the MARC format in use, they are usually crafted on the same basis and are interoperable with each other -to a certain extent. The data model of a MARC-based catalog, however, is rdquo[...] extremely non-normalized with excessive replication of datardquo [1]. For instance, a literary work that exists in numerous editions and translations is likely to yield a large result set because each edition or translation is represented by an individual record, that is unrelated to other records that describe the same work.
    Source
    Research and advanced technology for digital libraries : 7th European Conference, proceedings / ECDL 2003, Trondheim, Norway, August 17-22, 2003

Authors

Languages

  • e 255
  • d 41
  • chi 1
  • f 1
  • s 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 269
  • m 19
  • el 12
  • b 11
  • s 11
  • r 3
  • x 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications