Search (83 results, page 1 of 5)

  • × type_ss:"b"
  1. 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
  2. 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
  3. 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
  4. Lee, S.; Jacob, E.K.: ¬An integrated approach to metadata interoperability : construction of a conceptual structure between MARC and FRBR (2011) 0.07
    0.07128137 = product of:
      0.095041834 = sum of:
        0.051698197 = weight(_text_:digital in 302) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.051698197 = score(doc=302,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.26148933 = fieldWeight in 302, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=302)
        0.022971334 = weight(_text_:library in 302) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.022971334 = score(doc=302,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.17430481 = fieldWeight in 302, 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=302)
        0.0203723 = product of:
          0.0407446 = sum of:
            0.0407446 = weight(_text_:22 in 302) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0407446 = score(doc=302,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050121464 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 302, 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=302)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.75 = coord(3/4)
    
    Abstract
    Machine-Readable Cataloging (MARC) is currently the most broadly used bibliographic standard for encoding and exchanging bibliographic data. However, MARC may not fully support representation of the dynamic nature and semantics of digital resources because of its rigid and single-layered linear structure. The Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) model, which is designed to overcome the problems of MARC, does not provide sufficient data elements and adopts a predetermined hierarchy. A flexible structure for bibliographic data with detailed data elements is needed. Integrating MARC format with the hierarchical structure of FRBR is one approach to meet this need. The purpose of this research is to propose an approach that can facilitate interoperability between MARC and FRBR by providing a conceptual structure that can function as a mediator between MARC data elements and FRBR attributes.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Source
    Library resources and technical services. 55(2011) no.1, S.17-32
  5. Strader, C.R.: Author-assigned keywords versus Library of Congress Subject Headings : implications for the cataloging of electronic theses and dissertations (2009) 0.07
    0.06986505 = product of:
      0.1397301 = sum of:
        0.039787523 = weight(_text_:library in 3602) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039787523 = score(doc=3602,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.30190483 = fieldWeight in 3602, 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=3602)
        0.09994257 = sum of:
          0.059197973 = weight(_text_:project in 3602) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.059197973 = score(doc=3602,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.21156175 = queryWeight, product of:
                4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
                0.050121464 = queryNorm
              0.27981415 = fieldWeight in 3602, 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=3602)
          0.0407446 = weight(_text_:22 in 3602) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
            0.0407446 = score(doc=3602,freq=2.0), product of:
              0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
                3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                0.050121464 = queryNorm
              0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3602, 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=3602)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    This study is an examination of the overlap between author-assigned keywords and cataloger-assigned Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH) for a set of electronic theses and dissertations in Ohio State University's online catalog. The project is intended to contribute to the literature on the issue of keywords versus controlled vocabularies in the use of online catalogs and databases. Findings support previous studies' conclusions that both keywords and controlled vocabularies complement one another. Further, even in the presence of bibliographic record enhancements, such as abstracts or summaries, keywords and subject headings provided a significant number of unique terms that could affect the success of keyword searches. Implications for the maintenance of controlled vocabularies such as LCSH also are discussed in light of the patterns of matches and nonmatches found between the keywords and their corresponding subject headings.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Source
    Library resources and technical services. 53(2009) no.4, S.243-250
  6. Bailey, C.W. Jr.: Scholarly electronic publishing bibliography (2003) 0.06
    0.05644991 = product of:
      0.11289982 = sum of:
        0.073112294 = weight(_text_:digital in 1656) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.073112294 = score(doc=1656,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.36980176 = fieldWeight in 1656, 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=1656)
        0.039787523 = weight(_text_:library in 1656) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039787523 = score(doc=1656,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.30190483 = fieldWeight in 1656, 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=1656)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Content
    Table of Contents 1 Economic Issues* 2 Electronic Books and Texts 2.1 Case Studies and History 2.2 General Works* 2.3 Library Issues* 3 Electronic Serials 3.1 Case Studies and History 3.2 Critiques 3.3 Electronic Distribution of Printed Journals 3.4 General Works* 3.5 Library Issues* 3.6 Research* 4 General Works* 5 Legal Issues 5.1 Intellectual Property Rights* 5.2 License Agreements 5.3 Other Legal Issues 6 Library Issues 6.1 Cataloging, Identifiers, Linking, and Metadata* 6.2 Digital Libraries* 6.3 General Works* 6.4 Information Integrity and Preservation* 7 New Publishing Models* 8 Publisher Issues 8.1 Digital Rights Management* 9 Repositories and E-Prints* Appendix A. Related Bibliographies by the Same Author Appendix B. About the Author
  7. Ruiter, J. de: Aspects of dealing with digital information : "mature" novices on the Internet (2002) 0.05
    0.052653216 = product of:
      0.10530643 = sum of:
        0.086163655 = weight(_text_:digital in 46) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.086163655 = score(doc=46,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.4358155 = fieldWeight in 46, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=46)
        0.01914278 = weight(_text_:library in 46) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01914278 = score(doc=46,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.14525402 = fieldWeight in 46, 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=46)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    This article seeks to address the following questions: Why do certain people, who are fully information literate with printed materials, become hesitant and even reluctant when it comes to finding something on the Internet? And why do we, information professionals, find it difficult to support them adequately? Mature users of digital information are often skeptical about the value of the Internet as a source for professional information. Over the years much has been achieved, but many prophecies of the experts on digitalization from the early hours still have not yet been fulfilled. Mature users do possess all skills needed to be digital-information literate, but they need to be assisted in specific areas where those skills are insufficient. They tend to blame themselves even if shortcomings in accessibility of digital sources and computer errors obstruct their search. Operating hardware requires a dexterity that can only be acquired by experience. Instruction should be hands-on; demonstration is far less effective. Special attention should be given to reading and interpreting navigation information on the screen and to the search strategies the Internet requires. Use of imagination and trial-and-error methods are to be recommended in this respect.
    Source
    Library trends. 51(2002) no.2, S.199-209
  8. Denda, K.: Beyond subject headings : a structured information retrieval tool for interdisciplinary fields (2005) 0.05
    0.050567575 = product of:
      0.10113515 = sum of:
        0.053599782 = weight(_text_:library in 1038) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.053599782 = score(doc=1038,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.40671125 = fieldWeight in 1038, 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=1038)
        0.047535364 = product of:
          0.09507073 = sum of:
            0.09507073 = weight(_text_:22 in 1038) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.09507073 = score(doc=1038,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050121464 = queryNorm
                0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 1038, 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=1038)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Source
    Library resources and technical services. 49(2005) no.4, S.266-
  9. Jones, E.: ¬The FRBR model as applied to continuing resources (2005) 0.05
    0.050567575 = product of:
      0.10113515 = sum of:
        0.053599782 = weight(_text_:library in 2900) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.053599782 = score(doc=2900,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.40671125 = fieldWeight in 2900, 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=2900)
        0.047535364 = product of:
          0.09507073 = sum of:
            0.09507073 = weight(_text_:22 in 2900) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.09507073 = score(doc=2900,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050121464 = queryNorm
                0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 2900, 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=2900)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Source
    Library resources and technical services. 49(2005) no.4, S.227-242
  10. Rolla, P.J.: User tags versus Subject headings : can user-supplied data improve subject access to library collections? (2009) 0.04
    0.042672526 = product of:
      0.08534505 = sum of:
        0.06497275 = weight(_text_:library in 3601) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06497275 = score(doc=3601,freq=16.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.4930085 = fieldWeight in 3601, product of:
              4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
                16.0 = termFreq=16.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3601)
        0.0203723 = product of:
          0.0407446 = sum of:
            0.0407446 = weight(_text_:22 in 3601) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0407446 = score(doc=3601,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050121464 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3601, 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=3601)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    Some members of the library community, including the Library of Congress Working Group on the Future of Bibliographic Control, have suggested that libraries should open up their catalogs to allow users to add descriptive tags to the bibliographic data in catalog records. The web site LibraryThing currently permits its members to add such user tags to its records for books and therefore provides a useful resource to contrast with library bibliographic records. A comparison between the LibraryThing tags for a group of books and the library-supplied subject headings for the same books shows that users and catalogers approach these descriptors very differently. Because of these differences, user tags can enhance subject access to library materials, but they cannot entirely replace controlled vocabularies such as the Library of Congress subject headings.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Source
    Library resources and technical services. 53(2009) no.3, S.174-184
  11. Bowen, J.: FRBR : coming soon to your library? (2005) 0.04
    0.04057437 = product of:
      0.08114874 = sum of:
        0.060776442 = weight(_text_:library in 122) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.060776442 = score(doc=122,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.46116722 = fieldWeight in 122, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=122)
        0.0203723 = product of:
          0.0407446 = sum of:
            0.0407446 = weight(_text_:22 in 122) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0407446 = score(doc=122,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050121464 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 122, 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=122)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    The Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) data model holds great potential for improving access to library resources, but may not affect all libraries in the same way. The Joint Steering Committee for Revision of AACR (Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules), assisted by the work of its Format Variation Working Group, is exploring ways to incorporate FRBR into the next edition of the Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules to facilitate collocation at the level of the FRBR entity expression. Several library system vendors are also adding FRBR-based functionality to their systems. A combination of these two approaches to FRBR can provide significant benefits to users. Most FRBR entities and attributes are already present in library catalog records, and the influence of FRBR can also be seen in existing library activities. FRBR is thus not something totally foreign, but a fresh, more rigorous way of thinking about what libraries already do that provides a basis for designing new ways to improve users' access to library resources.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Source
    Library resources and technical services. 49(2005) no.3, S.175-188
  12. Aliprand, J.M.: Scripts, languages, and authority control (2005) 0.04
    0.04010655 = product of:
      0.0802131 = sum of:
        0.05305003 = weight(_text_:library in 455) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05305003 = score(doc=455,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.40253976 = fieldWeight in 455, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=455)
        0.027163066 = product of:
          0.054326132 = sum of:
            0.054326132 = weight(_text_:22 in 455) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.054326132 = score(doc=455,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050121464 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 455, 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=455)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    Library vendors' use of Unicode is leading to library systems with multiscript capability, which offers the prospect of multiscript authority records. Although librarians tend to focus on Unicode in relation to non-Roman scripts, language is a more important feature of authority records than script. The concept of a catalog locale (of which language is one aspect) is introduced. Restrictions on the structure and content of a MARC 21 authority record are outlined, and the alternative structures for authority records containing languages written in non-Roman scripts are described.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Source
    Library resources and technical services. 49(2005) no.4, S.243-249
  13. Charbonneau, M.D.: Production benchmarks for catalogers in academic libraries : are we there yet? (2005) 0.04
    0.03868373 = product of:
      0.07736746 = sum of:
        0.053599782 = weight(_text_:library in 128) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.053599782 = score(doc=128,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.40671125 = fieldWeight in 128, 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=128)
        0.023767682 = product of:
          0.047535364 = sum of:
            0.047535364 = weight(_text_:22 in 128) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.047535364 = score(doc=128,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050121464 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 128, 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=128)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    This paper examines existing library and personnel literature to determine whether any strides have been made among academic libraries in determining cataloging productivity benchmarks. The perceived importance of performance evaluations based on quantitative and qualitative standards is explored, as is the intended effect of established cataloging production norms. The pros and cons of cataloging benchmarks are analyzed from four different perspectives: library administration, library human resources, cataloging managers, and cataloging staff. The paper concludes that additional research is needed in order to determine whether established production cataloging benchmarks are feasible and meaningful within academic libraries.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Source
    Library resources and technical services. 49(2005) no.1, S.40-48
  14. 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
  15. Gray, B.: Cataloging the special collections of Allegheny college (2005) 0.04
    0.03509323 = product of:
      0.07018646 = sum of:
        0.04641878 = weight(_text_:library in 127) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04641878 = score(doc=127,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.3522223 = fieldWeight in 127, 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=127)
        0.023767682 = product of:
          0.047535364 = sum of:
            0.047535364 = weight(_text_:22 in 127) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.047535364 = score(doc=127,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050121464 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 127, 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=127)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    Scholars have long noted the significance of Allegheny College's special collections to American cultural and educational history. Special collections have value to colleges and universities as publicity devices to draw scholars, students, and funding to the institution. Catalogers have an important role to play in marketing the library and the college through improved bibliographic access to these collections. Rare book and manuscript cataloging presents many challenges to catalogers, especially at smaller institutions. This report traces the evolution of Allegheny College's catalog, from book format in 1823, through card format, and finally to online. It also explores the bibliographic challenges created as the library moved from one format to another.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Source
    Library resources and technical services. 49(2005) no.1, S.49-56
  16. Moulaison, H.L.: OPAC queries at a medium-sized academic library : a transaction log analysis (2008) 0.04
    0.03509323 = product of:
      0.07018646 = sum of:
        0.04641878 = weight(_text_:library in 3599) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04641878 = score(doc=3599,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.3522223 = fieldWeight in 3599, 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=3599)
        0.023767682 = product of:
          0.047535364 = sum of:
            0.047535364 = weight(_text_:22 in 3599) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.047535364 = score(doc=3599,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050121464 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3599, 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=3599)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    Patron queries at a four-year comprehensive college's online public access catalog were examined via transaction logs from March 2007. Three representative days were isolated for a more detailed examination of search characteristics. The results show that library users employed an average of one to three terms in a search, did not use Boolean operators, and made use of limits one-tenth of the time. Failed queries remained problematic, as a full one-third of searches resulted in zero hits. Implications and recommendations for improvements in the online public access catalog are discussed.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Source
    Library resources and technical services. 52(2008) no.4, S.230-237
  17. Shorten, J.; Seikel, M.; Ahrberg, J.H.: Why do you still use dewey? : Academic libraries that continue with dewey decimal classification (2005) 0.03
    0.033157483 = product of:
      0.066314965 = sum of:
        0.045942668 = weight(_text_:library in 125) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.045942668 = score(doc=125,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.34860963 = fieldWeight in 125, 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=125)
        0.0203723 = product of:
          0.0407446 = sum of:
            0.0407446 = weight(_text_:22 in 125) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0407446 = score(doc=125,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050121464 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 125, 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=125)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    Reclassification was a popular trend during the 1960s and 1970s for many academic libraries wanting to change from Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) to Library of Congress (LC) Classification. In 2002, Southern Illinois University at Carbondale's Morris Library changed from DDC to LC. If one academic library recently converted, might other DDC academic libraries consider switching, too? Conversely, for those academic libraries that remain with DDC, what are the reasons they continue with it? A survey of thirty-four DDC academic libraries in the United States and Canada determined what factors influence these libraries to continue using DDC, and if reclassification is something they have considered or are considering. The survey also investigated whether patrons of these DDC libraries prefer LC and if their preference influences the library's decision to reclassify. Results from the survey indicate that the issue of reclassification is being considered by some of these libraries even though, overall, they are satisfied with DDC. The study was unable to determine if patrons' preference for a classification scheme influenced a library's decision to reclassify.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Source
    Library resources and technical services. 49(2005) no.2, S.123-133
  18. Chambers, S.; Myall, C.: Cataloging and classification : review of the literature 2007-8 (2010) 0.03
    0.030834224 = product of:
      0.06166845 = sum of:
        0.03790077 = weight(_text_:library in 4309) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03790077 = score(doc=4309,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.28758827 = fieldWeight in 4309, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4309)
        0.023767682 = product of:
          0.047535364 = sum of:
            0.047535364 = weight(_text_:22 in 4309) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.047535364 = score(doc=4309,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050121464 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4309, 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=4309)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    This paper surveys library literature on cataloging and classification published in 2007-8, indicating its extent and range in terms of types of literature, major subject areas, and themes. The paper reviews pertinent literature in the following areas: the future of bibliographic control, general cataloging standards and texts, Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR), cataloging varied resources, metadata and cataloging in the Web world, classification and subject access, questions of diversity and diverse perspectives, additional reports of practice and research, catalogers' education and careers, keeping current through columns and blogs, and cataloging history.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Source
    Library resources and technical services. 54(2010) no.2, S.90-114
  19. Williams, R.V.; Whitmire, L.; Bradley, C.: Bibliography of the history of information science in North America : 1900-1995 (1997) 0.03
    0.030666022 = product of:
      0.061332043 = sum of:
        0.026799891 = weight(_text_:library in 53) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026799891 = score(doc=53,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.20335563 = fieldWeight in 53, 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=53)
        0.034532152 = product of:
          0.069064304 = sum of:
            0.069064304 = weight(_text_:project in 53) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.069064304 = score(doc=53,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.21156175 = queryWeight, product of:
                  4.220981 = idf(docFreq=1764, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050121464 = queryNorm
                0.32644984 = fieldWeight in 53, 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=53)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Abstract
    A bibliography of the history of information science in North America, 1900-1995, created by the University of South Caroline College of Library and Information Science, USA, under a grant from the Special Interest Group Projects Fund of the American Society for Information Science. The project identified early individual and organizations of information science in the USA and Canada, determines the location of the personal/professional papers and archives of these pioneers, and compiled the bibliography. The bibliography id divided into: books (including encyclopaedia articles), journal articles, and unpublished papers
  20. Gatti, T.H.: Utilization of students as cataloging assistants at carnegie category I institution libraries (2005) 0.03
    0.028895756 = product of:
      0.057791512 = sum of:
        0.030628446 = weight(_text_:library in 43) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030628446 = score(doc=43,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.23240642 = fieldWeight in 43, 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=43)
        0.027163066 = product of:
          0.054326132 = sum of:
            0.054326132 = weight(_text_:22 in 43) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.054326132 = score(doc=43,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.050121464 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 43, 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=43)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.5 = coord(2/4)
    
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
    Source
    Library resources and technical services. 49(2005) no.1, S.27-31

Languages

  • e 72
  • d 8
  • m 1
  • nl 1
  • ru 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 48
  • m 23
  • i 6
  • el 5
  • ? 1
  • More… Less…