Search (9 results, page 1 of 1)

0.015314223 = product of:
  0.061256893 = sum of:
    0.061256893 = weight(_text_:library in 2009) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.061256893 = score(doc=2009,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.46481284 = fieldWeight in 2009, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=2009)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Library history reviews. 3(1994) no.1, S.73-99

0.015078641 = product of:
  0.060314562 = sum of:
    0.060314562 = weight(_text_:digital in 2340) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.060314562 = score(doc=2340,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.19770671 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.944552 = idf(docFreq=2326, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.30507088 = fieldWeight in 2340, 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=2340)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Vannevar Bush's famous article, 'As we may think' (Atlantic monthly 176(1945) S.101-108) described an imaginary information retrieval machine, the Memex. The Memex is usually viewed, unhistorically, in relation to subsequent developments using digital computers. This study reconstructs the little-known background of information retrieval in and before 1939 when 'As we may think' was originally written. The Memex was based on Bush's work during 1938-40 in developing an improved photoelectric microfilm selector, an electronic retrieval technology pioneered by Emanuel Goldberg of Zeiss, Ikon Dresden, in the 1920s. Visionary statements by Paul Otlet (1934) and Walter Schürmeyer (1935) and the development of electronic document retrieval technology before Bush are examined

0.013267696 = product of:
  0.053070784 = sum of:
    0.053070784 = product of:
      0.15921235 = sum of:
        0.15921235 = weight(_text_:3a in 7394) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.15921235 = score(doc=7394,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.42493033 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.3746787 = fieldWeight in 7394, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=7394)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Ergebnis einer Umfrage aus dem Frühjahr 1993. A. Wissenschaftliche Bibliotheken: Versandt wurde der Fragebogen an die Mitglieder der Sektion IV des DBV. Fragen: (1a) Um welchen Bestand handelt es sich, der sachlich erschlossen wird? (1b) Wie groß ist dieser Bestand? (1c) Wird dieser Bestand vollständig oder nur in Auswahl (einzelne Fächer, Lehrbücher, Dissertationen o.ä.) sachlich erschlossen? (1d) Seit wann bestehen die jetzigen Sachkataloge? (2) Auf welche Art wird der Bestand zur Zeit sachlich erschlossen? (3a) Welche Klassifikation wird angewendet? (3b) Gibt es alphabetisches SyK-Register bzw. einen Zugriff auf die Klassenbeschreibungen? (3c) Gibt es ergänzende Schlüssel für die Aspekte Ort, Zeit, Form? (4) Falls Sie einen SWK führen (a) nach welchem Regelwerk? (b) Gibt es ein genormtes Vokabular oder einen Thesaurus (ggf. nur für bestimmte Fächer)? (5) In welcher Form existieren die Sachkataloge? (6) Ist die Bibliothek an einer kooperativen Sacherschließung, z.B. in einem Verbund beteiligt? [Nein: 79%] (7) Nutzen Sie Fremdleistungen bei der Sacherschließung? [Ja: 46%] (8) Welche sachlichen Suchmöglichkeiten gibt es für Benutzer? (9) Sind zukünftige Veränderungen bei der Sacherschließung geplant? [Ja: 73%]. - B. Öffentliche Bibliotheken: Die Umfrage richtete sich an alle ÖBs der Sektionen I, II und III des DBV. Fragen: (1) Welche Sachkataloge führen Sie? (2) Welche Klassifikationen (Systematiken) liegen dem SyK zugrunde? [ASB: 242; KAB: 333; SfB: 4 (???); SSD: 11; Berliner: 18] (3) Führen Sie ein eigenes Schlagwort-Register zum SyK bzw. zur Klassifikation (Systematik)? (4) Führen Sie den SWK nach ...? [RSWK: 132 (= ca. 60%) anderen Regeln: 93] (5) Seit wann bestehen die jetzigen Sachkataloge? (6) In welcher Form existiern die Sachkataloge? (7) In welchem Umfang wird der Bestand erschlossen? (8) Welche Signaturen verwenden Sie? (9) Ist die Bibliothek an einer kooperativen Sacherschließung, z.B. einem Verbund, beteiligt? [Nein: 96%] (10) Nutzen Sie Fremdleistungen bei der Sacherschließung? [Ja: 70%] (11) Woher beziehen Sie diese Fremdleistungen? (12) Verfügen Sie über ein Online-Katalogsystem mit OPAC? [Ja: 78; Nein: 614] (13) Sind zukünftig Veränderungen bei der Sacherschließung geplant? [Nein: 458; Ja: 237]; RESÜMEE für ÖB: "(i) Einführung von EDV-Katalogen bleibt auch in den 90er Jahren ein Thema, (ii) Der Aufbau von SWK wird in vielen Bibliotheken in Angriff genommen, dabei spielt die Fremddatenübernahme eine entscheidende Rolle, (iii) RSWK werden zunehmend angewandt, Nutzung der SWD auch für andere Regeln wirkt normierend, (iv) Große Bewegung auf dem 'Systematik-Markt' ist in absehbarer Zeit nicht zu erwarten, (v) Für kleinere Bibliotheken wird der Zettelkatalog auf absehbare Zeit noch die herrschende Katalogform sein, (vi) Der erhebliche Nachholbedarf in den neuen Bundesländern wird nur in einem größeren Zeitraum zu leisten sein. ??? SPEZIALBIBIOTHEKEN ???

0.011485667 = product of:
  0.045942668 = sum of:
    0.045942668 = weight(_text_:library in 7674) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.045942668 = score(doc=7674,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.34860963 = fieldWeight in 7674, 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=7674)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

In 1964 Swanson published an article 'Dialogues with a catalog', in which he presented a personal prescription for what a library catalog should look like at some future date. He was in many ways remarkably visionary; some of the features he recommended have still not been implemented, although writers are again referring to their desirability. Despite its visionary qualities, Swanson's article seems to have been quite forgotten. At least, it is rarely cited. This article will trace the development of OPACs from the time they were first introduced into libraries and compare what has occured with Swanson's recommendations. It is remarkable that an article written thirty years ago could still offer a suitable framework within which to review virtually the totality of OPAC developments. The lesson that emerges most clearly from this is that the library profession should prescribe performance goals for tools and services that are not constrained by existing technologies. We must first establish requirements and seek the solutions later

Footnote

Bezugnahme auf: Swanson, D.R.: Dialogues with a catalog. In: Library quarterly 34(1964) S.113-125

Source

Library quarterly. 64(1994) no.2, S.130-161

0.01018615 = product of:
  0.0407446 = sum of:
    0.0407446 = product of:
      0.0814892 = sum of:
        0.0814892 = weight(_text_:22 in 6041) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0814892 = score(doc=6041,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17551683 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.050121464 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 6041, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6041)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Series

Kölner Arbeiten zum Bibliotheks- und Dokumentationswesen; H.22

0.009475192 = product of:
  0.03790077 = sum of:
    0.03790077 = weight(_text_:library in 5541) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03790077 = score(doc=5541,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.28758827 = fieldWeight in 5541, 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=5541)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

The Bünau Library catalogue (1750-56), which initially comprised 3 tomes of 7 volumes and had 16.000 authors listed in its final index, is the most systematically structured in the history of bibliography, its architecture being so analytical that it almost fulfils the librarian's dream of so organising a collection that it develops organically from within. Describes with examples of indexing the work of the Bünau Library's first director, J.M. Franke (1717-75), who began his task with the 42.000 volumes in Count Heinrich von Bülau's private collection, and later supervised their incorporation with the Brühl and Dresden Electoral Library collections

0.0076571116 = product of:
  0.030628446 = sum of:
    0.030628446 = weight(_text_:library in 5517) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030628446 = score(doc=5517,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.23240642 = fieldWeight in 5517, 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=5517)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Descriptive account of the rudimentary techniques used to organise documentation materials in the earliest libraries, covering Mesopotamia about 4.000 BC, for the creation of colophons, labels and catalogues; Egypt about 2.000 BC, for papyrus rolls with title at the end and labels in red ink; and classical Greece and Rome, for the catalogues in the library at Alexandria, and private and public libraries in Rome in the 1st century AD using classification by content

0.0057428335 = product of:
  0.022971334 = sum of:
    0.022971334 = weight(_text_:library in 7300) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022971334 = score(doc=7300,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.17430481 = fieldWeight in 7300, 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=7300)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Mobilising the information stored in documents to advance learning and social well-being provides information science with a fundamental social objective. It also presents it with a characteristic set of technical and professional problems. Until recently, information storage and retrieval systems, of which the library is one of the oldest and most important examples, have not provided a direct solutuion to the problem of providing access to needed information. Instead they have attempted to identify and provide physical access to written or printed documents that might contain information that is needed or might be useful. Perhaps creating systems to substitute what documents may be about for what documents contain is a process of realistic simplfication in the face of overwhleming technical and 'epistemological' problems. But it is speculative approaches to overcoming these problems that are the subject of this paper

0.0057428335 = product of:
  0.022971334 = sum of:
    0.022971334 = weight(_text_:library in 539) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.022971334 = score(doc=539,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1317883 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
          0.050121464 = queryNorm
        0.17430481 = fieldWeight in 539, 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=539)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)