Search (1476 results, page 1 of 74)

0.08316921 = product of:
  0.16633841 = sum of:
    0.16633841 = product of:
      0.49901524 = sum of:
        0.49901524 = weight(_text_:3a in 973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.49901524 = score(doc=973,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.4439495 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052364815 = queryNorm
            1.1240361 = fieldWeight in 973, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=973)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Vgl.: http%3A%2F%2Fcreativechoice.org%2Fdoc%2FHansJonas.pdf&usg=AOvVaw1TM3teaYKgABL5H9yoIifA&opi=89978449.

0.06930768 = product of:
  0.13861535 = sum of:
    0.13861535 = product of:
      0.41584605 = sum of:
        0.41584605 = weight(_text_:3a in 1826) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.41584605 = score(doc=1826,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.4439495 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052364815 = queryNorm
            0.93669677 = fieldWeight in 1826, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1826)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

http://www.google.de/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=5&ved=0CDQQFjAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdigbib.ubka.uni-karlsruhe.de%2Fvolltexte%2Fdocuments%2F3131107&ei=HzFWVYvGMsiNsgGTyoFI&usg=AFQjCNE2FHUeR9oQTQlNC4TPedv4Mo3DaQ&sig2=Rlzpr7a3BLZZkqZCXXN_IA&bvm=bv.93564037,d.bGg&cad=rja

0.06656775 = product of:
  0.1331355 = sum of:
    0.1331355 = sum of:
      0.047998987 = weight(_text_:library in 2555) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.047998987 = score(doc=2555,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.13768692 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.34860963 = fieldWeight in 2555, 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=2555)
      0.08513651 = weight(_text_:22 in 2555) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08513651 = score(doc=2555,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18337266 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 2555, 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=2555)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

15. 1.2016 19:22:28

0.06656775 = product of:
  0.1331355 = sum of:
    0.1331355 = sum of:
      0.047998987 = weight(_text_:library in 4973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.047998987 = score(doc=4973,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.13768692 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.34860963 = fieldWeight in 4973, 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=4973)
      0.08513651 = weight(_text_:22 in 4973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.08513651 = score(doc=4973,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18337266 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 4973, 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=4973)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

1. 2.2019 12:50:22

0.056135774 = product of:
  0.11227155 = sum of:
    0.11227155 = sum of:
      0.062608585 = weight(_text_:library in 5149) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.062608585 = score(doc=5149,freq=10.0), product of:
          0.13768692 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.45471698 = fieldWeight in 5149, 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=5149)
      0.049662966 = weight(_text_:22 in 5149) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.049662966 = score(doc=5149,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18337266 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5149, 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=5149)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This article describes the Digital Library North (DLN) project, a collaboration among researchers at the University of Alberta, staff at the Inuvialuit Cultural Resource Centre, and communities within the Inuvialuit Settlement Region (ISR) to develop a culturally appropriate metadata framework for a digital library of cultural resources. It will discuss gathering of data to inform the first iteration of the metadata framework and digital library prototype, as well as revisions made to both the framework and the digital library based on feedback obtained through community interaction with the prototype.

Date

18. 3.2019 14:16:22

0.05100578 = product of:
  0.10201156 = sum of:
    0.10201156 = sum of:
      0.04525388 = weight(_text_:library in 2601) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04525388 = score(doc=2601,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.13768692 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.32867232 = fieldWeight in 2601, 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=2601)
      0.056757677 = weight(_text_:22 in 2601) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.056757677 = score(doc=2601,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18337266 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2601, 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=2601)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This study is a citation analysis of a set of theses and dissertations in the Ohio State University's online catalog, for which the author-assigned keywords and cataloger-assigned Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH) are known. Correlations are sought between the types and ages of resources cited and the number of unique keywords and unique LCSH that were found. The author presents results found in three general discipline areas: arts and humanities, the social sciences, and science, technology, engineering, and medicine.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

Source

Library resources and technical services. 56(2012) no.4, S.238-253

0.049079686 = product of:
  0.09815937 = sum of:
    0.09815937 = sum of:
      0.048496403 = weight(_text_:library in 1466) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.048496403 = score(doc=1466,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.13768692 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.3522223 = fieldWeight in 1466, 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=1466)
      0.049662966 = weight(_text_:22 in 1466) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.049662966 = score(doc=1466,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18337266 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1466, 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=1466)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The paper discusses the issue of increasing users' access to library records by their publication in Google. Data from the records, converted into html format, have been indexed by Google. The process covered basic formal description fields of the records, description of the content, supported with a thesaurus, as well as an abstract, if present in the record. In addition to monitoring the end users' statistics, the pilot testing covered visibility of library records in Google search results.

Source

Knowledge organization in the 21st century: between historical patterns and future prospects. Proceedings of the Thirteenth International ISKO Conference 19-22 May 2014, Kraków, Poland. Ed.: Wieslaw Babik

0.049079686 = product of:
  0.09815937 = sum of:
    0.09815937 = sum of:
      0.048496403 = weight(_text_:library in 1893) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.048496403 = score(doc=1893,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.13768692 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.3522223 = fieldWeight in 1893, 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=1893)
      0.049662966 = weight(_text_:22 in 1893) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.049662966 = score(doc=1893,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18337266 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1893, 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=1893)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This article re-visits a scenario from 1987: a university president required a library director to reclassify some materials into a science classification. The author looks at the prominence of the Code of Ethics of the American Library Association in the general library literature and in classification and cataloging practice literature. The issue of censorship is also discussed. The author then reviews classification for Creationism and Intelligent design and some decision-making processes one could use when deciding on the professional ethics of such a request, concluding that in some cases the ethical action might indeed be to go ahead with the reclassification.

Date

25. 5.2015 18:22:47

0.049079686 = product of:
  0.09815937 = sum of:
    0.09815937 = sum of:
      0.048496403 = weight(_text_:library in 1899) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.048496403 = score(doc=1899,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.13768692 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.3522223 = fieldWeight in 1899, 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=1899)
      0.049662966 = weight(_text_:22 in 1899) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.049662966 = score(doc=1899,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18337266 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1899, 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=1899)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Dominican University's Graduate School of Library and Information Science (GSLIS) was one of a funnel group of graduate schools of library and information science selected to test RDA. A seminar specifically for this purpose was conducted from August to December 2010. Fifteen students participated in the test, creating records in AACR2 and in RDA, encoding them in the MARC format, and responding to the required questionnaires. In addition to record creation, the students were also asked to submit a final paper in which they described their experiences and recommended whether or not to accept RDA as a replacement for AACR2.

Date

25. 5.2015 18:36:22

0.049079686 = product of:
  0.09815937 = sum of:
    0.09815937 = sum of:
      0.048496403 = weight(_text_:library in 2592) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.048496403 = score(doc=2592,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.13768692 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.3522223 = fieldWeight in 2592, 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=2592)
      0.049662966 = weight(_text_:22 in 2592) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.049662966 = score(doc=2592,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18337266 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2592, 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=2592)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

In June 2009, the Association for Library Collections and Technical Services Heads of Technical Services in Large Research Libraries Interest Group established the Task Force on Cost/Value Assessment of Bibliographic Control to address recommendation 5.1.1.1 of On the Record: Report of the Library of Congress Working Group on the Future of Bibliographic Control, which focused on developing measures for costs, benefits, and value of bibliographic control. This paper outlines results of that task force's efforts to develop and articulate metrics for evaluating the cost and value of cataloging activities specifically, and offers some next steps that the community could take to further the profession's collective understanding of the costs and values associated with bibliographic control.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

Source

Library resources and technical services. 55(2011) no.3, S.124-137

0.049079686 = product of:
  0.09815937 = sum of:
    0.09815937 = sum of:
      0.048496403 = weight(_text_:library in 2632) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.048496403 = score(doc=2632,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.13768692 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.3522223 = fieldWeight in 2632, 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=2632)
      0.049662966 = weight(_text_:22 in 2632) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.049662966 = score(doc=2632,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18337266 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2632, 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=2632)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This article describes in detail the library implementation of a Resource Description and Access (RDA) Enrichment project. The library "hybridized," or enriched legacy data from Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules bibliographic records by the addition of specific RDA elements. The project also cleaned up various other elements in the bibliographic data that were not directly RDA-related. There were over 28 million changes and edits made to these records, changes that would never have been made otherwise because the library lacked the resources to do them independently. The enrichment project made the bibliographic data consistent, and helped prepared the data for its eventual transition to a linked data environment.

Date

21. 1.2016 19:08:22

0.048515376 = product of:
  0.09703075 = sum of:
    0.09703075 = product of:
      0.29109225 = sum of:
        0.29109225 = weight(_text_:3a in 5955) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.29109225 = score(doc=5955,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.4439495 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052364815 = queryNorm
            0.65568775 = fieldWeight in 5955, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5955)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Footnote

Rez. in: Philosophisch-ethische Rezensionen vom 09.11.2019 (Jürgen Czogalla), Unter: https://philosophisch-ethische-rezensionen.de/rezension/Goedert1.html. In: B.I.T. online 23(2020) H.3, S.345-347 (W. Sühl-Strohmenger) [Unter: https%3A%2F%2Fwww.b-i-t-online.de%2Fheft%2F2020-03-rezensionen.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0iY3f_zNcvEjeZ6inHVnOK]. In: Open Password Nr. 805 vom 14.08.2020 (H.-C. Hobohm) [Unter: https://www.password-online.de/?mailpoet_router&endpoint=view_in_browser&action=view&data=WzE0MywiOGI3NjZkZmNkZjQ1IiwwLDAsMTMxLDFd].

0.045283623 = product of:
  0.090567246 = sum of:
    0.090567246 = sum of:
      0.047998987 = weight(_text_:library in 2594) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.047998987 = score(doc=2594,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.13768692 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.34860963 = fieldWeight in 2594, 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=2594)
      0.042568255 = weight(_text_:22 in 2594) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042568255 = score(doc=2594,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18337266 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2594, 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=2594)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Standard library classification systems like Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC), U.S. Library of Congress Classification (LCC), and Universal Decimal Classification (UDC) are internationally known and widely used by libraries as the tools for organizing information. Charles Ammi Cutter's Expansive Classification (EC), James Duff Brown's Subject Classification (SC), Henry E. Bliss' Bibliographic Classification (BC), and S. R. Ranganathan's Colon Classification (CC) also are standard classification systems, but they are less commonly used compared to aforementioned three systems. All these systems are easy to use and convenient for most general collection libraries. However, these systems are not adequate for some special collections. Libraries with rich collections on Islam also face problems while using these systems, although such libraries often use expansions in the original systems for their collections. This paper examines this problem and presents a potential optimal solution. The author collected data, using a semistructured interview technique, from a representative sample of thirty libraries in eight countries with strong collections in Islam. These data were analyzed employing qualitative methods.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

Source

Library resources and technical services. 56(2012) no.3, S.171-182

0.045283623 = product of:
  0.090567246 = sum of:
    0.090567246 = sum of:
      0.047998987 = weight(_text_:library in 2595) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.047998987 = score(doc=2595,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.13768692 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.34860963 = fieldWeight in 2595, 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=2595)
      0.042568255 = weight(_text_:22 in 2595) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042568255 = score(doc=2595,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18337266 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2595, 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=2595)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Academic libraries have moved toward providing social networking features, such as tagging, in their library catalogs. To explore whether user tags can enhance access to individual literary works, the author obtained a sample of individual works of English and American literature from the twentieth and twenty-first centuries from a large academic library catalog and searched them in LibraryThing. The author compared match rates, the availability of subject headings and tags across various literary forms, and the terminology used in tags versus controlled-vocabulary headings on a subset of records. In addition, she evaluated the usefulness of available LibraryThing tags for the library catalog records that lacked subject headings. Options for utilizing the subject terms available in sources outside the local catalog also are discussed.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

Source

Library resources and technical services. 55(2011) no.4, S.221-233

0.045283623 = product of:
  0.090567246 = sum of:
    0.090567246 = sum of:
      0.047998987 = weight(_text_:library in 2604) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.047998987 = score(doc=2604,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.13768692 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.34860963 = fieldWeight in 2604, 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=2604)
      0.042568255 = weight(_text_:22 in 2604) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042568255 = score(doc=2604,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18337266 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2604, 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=2604)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Among the many issues associated with integrating e-books into library collections and services, the revision of existing workflows in cataloging units has received little attention. The experience designing new workflows for e-books at Oregon State University Libraries since 2008 is described in detail from the perspective of three different sources of e-books. These descriptions highlight where the workflows applied to each vendor's stream differ. A workflow was developed for each vendor, based on the quality and source of available bibliographic records and the staff member performing the task. Involving cataloging staff as early as possible in the process of purchasing e-books from a new vendor ensures that a suitable workflow can be designed and implemented as soon as possible. This ensures that the representation of e-books in the library catalog is not delayed, increasing the likelihood that users will readily find and use these resources that the library has purchased.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

Source

Library resources and technical services. 58(2014) no.2, S.127-136

0.045283623 = product of:
  0.090567246 = sum of:
    0.090567246 = sum of:
      0.047998987 = weight(_text_:library in 2610) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.047998987 = score(doc=2610,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.13768692 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.34860963 = fieldWeight in 2610, 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=2610)
      0.042568255 = weight(_text_:22 in 2610) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042568255 = score(doc=2610,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18337266 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2610, 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=2610)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Aggregates have been a frequent topic of discussion between library science researchers. This study seeks to better understand aggregates through the analysis of a sample of bibliographic records and review of the cataloging treatment of aggregates. The study focuses on determining how common aggregates are in library collections, what types of aggregates exist, how aggregates are described in bibliographic records, and the criteria for identifying aggregates from the information in bibliographic records. A sample of bibliographic records representing textual resources was taken from OCLC's WorldCat database. More than 20 percent of the sampled records represented aggregates and more works were embodied in aggregates than were embodied in single work manifestations. A variety of issues, including cataloging practices and the varying definitions of aggregates, made it difficult to accurately identify and quantify the presence of aggregates using only the information from bibliographic records.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

Source

Library resources and technical services. 59(2015) no.3, S.120-129

0.044630054 = product of:
  0.08926011 = sum of:
    0.08926011 = sum of:
      0.039597142 = weight(_text_:library in 4309) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.039597142 = score(doc=4309,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.13768692 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = 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)
      0.049662966 = weight(_text_:22 in 4309) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.049662966 = score(doc=4309,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18337266 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = 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)

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

0.044630054 = product of:
  0.08926011 = sum of:
    0.08926011 = sum of:
      0.039597142 = weight(_text_:library in 2599) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.039597142 = score(doc=2599,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.13768692 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.28758827 = fieldWeight in 2599, 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=2599)
      0.049662966 = weight(_text_:22 in 2599) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.049662966 = score(doc=2599,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18337266 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2599, 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=2599)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

The US cataloging community is an interorganizational network with the Library of Congress (LC) as the lead organization, which reserves to itself the power to shape cataloging rules. Peripheral members of the network who are interested in modifying changes to the rules or to the network can use various strategies for organizational change that incorporate building ties to the decision-makers located at the hub of the network. The story of William E. Studwell's campaign for a subject heading code illustrates how some traditional scholarly methods of urging change-papers and presentations-are insufficient to achieve reform in an interorganizational network, absent strategies to build alliances with the decision makers.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

Source

Library resources and technical services. 58(2014) no.2, S.111-126

0.044630054 = product of:
  0.08926011 = sum of:
    0.08926011 = sum of:
      0.039597142 = weight(_text_:library in 2600) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.039597142 = score(doc=2600,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.13768692 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.28758827 = fieldWeight in 2600, 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=2600)
      0.049662966 = weight(_text_:22 in 2600) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.049662966 = score(doc=2600,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18337266 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2600, 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=2600)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Research libraries are using batchloading to provide access to many resources that they would otherwise be unable to catalog given the staff and other resources available. To explore how such libraries are managing their batchloading activities, the authors conducted a survey of the Association for Library Collections and Technical Services Directors of Large Research Libraries Interest Group member libraries. The survey addressed staffing, budgets, scope, workflow, management, quality standards, information technology support, collaborative efforts, and assessment of batchloading activities. The authors provide an analysis of the survey results along with suggestions for process improvements and future research.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

Source

Library resources and technical services. 56(2012) no.3, S.155-170

0.044630054 = product of:
  0.08926011 = sum of:
    0.08926011 = sum of:
      0.039597142 = weight(_text_:library in 2609) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.039597142 = score(doc=2609,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.13768692 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.6293786 = idf(docFreq=8668, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.28758827 = fieldWeight in 2609, 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=2609)
      0.049662966 = weight(_text_:22 in 2609) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.049662966 = score(doc=2609,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.18337266 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052364815 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2609, 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=2609)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This paper presents the results of a research study, a survey of library and information science master's degree holders who have taken a beginning cataloging course, to identify the elements of a beginning cataloging course that help students to learn cataloging concepts and skills. The results suggest that cataloging practice (the hands-on creation of bibliographic records or catalog cards), the effectiveness of the instructor, a balance of theory and practice, and placing cataloging in a real-world context contribute to effective learning. However, more research is needed to determine how, and to what the extent, each element should be incorporated into beginning cataloging courses.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

Source

Library resources and technical services. 59(2015) no.4, S.187-199