Search (151 results, page 1 of 8)

  • × theme_ss:"Datenformate"
  1. Yee, M.M.: New perspectives on the shared cataloging environment and a MARC 21 shopping list (2004) 0.06 
    0.062205013 = product of:
  0.15551253 = sum of:
    0.09896252 = weight(_text_:21 in 132) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09896252 = score(doc=132,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.16162895 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0979297 = idf(docFreq=5425, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052173212 = queryNorm
        0.61228216 = fieldWeight in 132, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.0979297 = idf(docFreq=5425, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=132)
    0.056550004 = weight(_text_:22 in 132) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.056550004 = score(doc=132,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1827017 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052173212 = queryNorm
        0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 132, 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=132)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    This paper surveys the cataloging literature to collect problems that have been identified with the MARC 21 format. The problems are sorted into (1) problems that are not the fault of MARC 21; (2) problems that perhaps are not problems at all; (3) problems that are connected with the current shared cataloging environment; and 4) other problems with MARC 21 and vendor implementation of it. The author makes recommendations to deal with the true MARC 21 problems that remain after this analysis.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  2. El-Sherbini, M.: Metadata and the future of cataloging (2001) 0.05 
    0.053282417 = product of:
  0.13320604 = sum of:
    0.076656036 = weight(_text_:21 in 751) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.076656036 = score(doc=751,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.16162895 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0979297 = idf(docFreq=5425, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052173212 = queryNorm
        0.4742717 = fieldWeight in 751, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.0979297 = idf(docFreq=5425, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=751)
    0.056550004 = weight(_text_:22 in 751) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.056550004 = score(doc=751,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1827017 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052173212 = queryNorm
        0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 751, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=751)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    This article is a survey of representative metadata efforts comparing them to MARC 21 metadata in order to determine if new electronic formats require the development of a new set of standards. This study surveys the ongoing metadata projects in order to identify what types of metadata exist and how they are used and also compares and analyzes selected metadata elements in an attempt to illustrate how they are related to MARC 21 metadata format elements.
    Date
    23. 1.2007 11:22:30
    Object
    MARC 21
  3. Bourne, R.: MARC harmonization : progress and problems (1997) 0.04 
    0.040322956 = product of:
  0.10080738 = sum of:
    0.04425738 = weight(_text_:21 in 873) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04425738 = score(doc=873,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.16162895 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0979297 = idf(docFreq=5425, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052173212 = queryNorm
        0.27382088 = fieldWeight in 873, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0979297 = idf(docFreq=5425, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=873)
    0.056550004 = weight(_text_:22 in 873) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.056550004 = score(doc=873,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1827017 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052173212 = queryNorm
        0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 873, 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=873)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Date
    27.10.1997 21:08:20
    Source
    LASER link. 1997, Spring/Summer, S.22-24
  4. Coyle, K.: Future considerations : the functional library systems record (2004) 0.04 
    0.040322956 = product of:
  0.10080738 = sum of:
    0.04425738 = weight(_text_:21 in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04425738 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.16162895 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0979297 = idf(docFreq=5425, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052173212 = queryNorm
        0.27382088 = fieldWeight in 562, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0979297 = idf(docFreq=5425, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=562)
    0.056550004 = weight(_text_:22 in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.056550004 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1827017 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052173212 = queryNorm
        0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 562, 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=562)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Date
    9.12.2005 19:21:29
    Source
    Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2, S.166-174
  5. Riva, P.: Mapping MARC 21 linking entry fields to FRBR and Tillett's taxonomy of bibliographic relationships (2004) 0.04 
    0.03996181 = product of:
  0.09990452 = sum of:
    0.057492025 = weight(_text_:21 in 136) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.057492025 = score(doc=136,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.16162895 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0979297 = idf(docFreq=5425, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052173212 = queryNorm
        0.35570377 = fieldWeight in 136, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.0979297 = idf(docFreq=5425, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=136)
    0.0424125 = weight(_text_:22 in 136) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0424125 = score(doc=136,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1827017 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052173212 = queryNorm
        0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 136, 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=136)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    Bibliographic relationships have taken on even greater importance in the context of ongoing efforts to integrate concepts from the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) into cataloging codes and database structures. In MARC 21, the linking entry fields are a major mechanism for expressing relationships between bibliographic records. Taxonomies of bibliographic relationships have been proposed by Tillett, with an extension by Smiraglia, and in FRBR itself. The present exercise is to provide a detailed bidirectional mapping of the MARC 21 linking fields to these two schemes. The correspondence of the Tillett taxonomic divisions to the MARC categorization of the linking fields as chronological, horizontal, or vertical is examined as well. Application of the findings to MARC format development and system functionality is discussed.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  6. Keith, C.: Using XSLT to manipulate MARC metadata (2004) 0.04 
    0.035741817 = product of:
  0.089354545 = sum of:
    0.04694204 = weight(_text_:21 in 4747) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04694204 = score(doc=4747,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.16162895 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0979297 = idf(docFreq=5425, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052173212 = queryNorm
        0.2904309 = fieldWeight in 4747, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.0979297 = idf(docFreq=5425, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4747)
    0.0424125 = weight(_text_:22 in 4747) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0424125 = score(doc=4747,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1827017 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052173212 = queryNorm
        0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4747, 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=4747)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    This paper describes the MARCXML architecture implemented at the Library of Congress. It gives an overview of the component pieces of the architecture, including the MARCXML schema and the MARCXML toolkit, while giving a brief tutorial on their use. Several different applications of the architecture and tools are discussed to illustrate the features of the toolkit being developed thus far. Nearly any metadata format can take advantage of the features of the toolkit, and the process of the toolkit enabling a new format is discussed. Finally, this paper intends to foster new ideas with regards to the transformation of descriptive metadata, especially using XML tools. In this paper the following conventions will be used: MARC21 will refer to MARC 21 records in the ISO 2709 record structure used today; MARCXML will refer to MARC 21 records in an XML structure.
    Source
    Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2, S.122-130
  7. UNIMARC and CDS/ISIS : Proceedings of the Workshops held in Budapest, 21.-22. June 1993 and Barcelona, 26. August 1993 (1994) 0.04 
    0.035282582 = product of:
  0.088206455 = sum of:
    0.03872521 = weight(_text_:21 in 8779) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03872521 = score(doc=8779,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.16162895 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0979297 = idf(docFreq=5425, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052173212 = queryNorm
        0.23959327 = fieldWeight in 8779, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0979297 = idf(docFreq=5425, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=8779)
    0.04948125 = weight(_text_:22 in 8779) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04948125 = score(doc=8779,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1827017 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052173212 = queryNorm
        0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 8779, 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=8779)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
  8. Croissant, C.R.: MARC21 und die anglo-amerikanische Katalogisierungspraxis (2004) 0.03 
    0.030242214 = product of:
  0.075605534 = sum of:
    0.033193033 = weight(_text_:21 in 1764) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033193033 = score(doc=1764,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.16162895 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0979297 = idf(docFreq=5425, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052173212 = queryNorm
        0.20536566 = fieldWeight in 1764, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0979297 = idf(docFreq=5425, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1764)
    0.0424125 = weight(_text_:22 in 1764) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0424125 = score(doc=1764,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1827017 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052173212 = queryNorm
        0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1764, 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=1764)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Date
    13. 8.2004 21:22:06
  9. McCallum, S.H.: Machine Readable Cataloging (MARC): 1975-2007 (2009) 0.03 
    0.030242214 = product of:
  0.075605534 = sum of:
    0.033193033 = weight(_text_:21 in 3841) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033193033 = score(doc=3841,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.16162895 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0979297 = idf(docFreq=5425, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052173212 = queryNorm
        0.20536566 = fieldWeight in 3841, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0979297 = idf(docFreq=5425, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3841)
    0.0424125 = weight(_text_:22 in 3841) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0424125 = score(doc=3841,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1827017 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052173212 = queryNorm
        0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3841, 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=3841)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Abstract
    This entry describes the development of the MARC Communications format. After a brief overview of the initial 10 years it describes the succeeding phases of development up to the present. This takes the reader through the expansion of the format for all types of bibliographic data and for a multiple character scripts. At the same time a large business community was developing that offered products based on the format to the library community. The introduction of the Internet in the 1990s and the Web technology brought new opportunities and challenges and the format was adapted to this new environment. There has been a great deal of international adoption of the format that has continued into the 2000s. More recently new syntaxes for MARC 21 and models are being explored.
    Date
    27. 8.2011 14:22:38
  10. Jimenez, V.O.R.: Nuevas perspectivas para la catalogacion : metadatos ver MARC (1999) 0.02 
    0.023992136 = product of:
  0.11996068 = sum of:
    0.11996068 = weight(_text_:22 in 5743) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11996068 = score(doc=5743,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1827017 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052173212 = queryNorm
        0.6565931 = fieldWeight in 5743, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=5743)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Date
    30. 3.2002 19:45:22
    Source
    Revista Española de Documentaçion Cientifica. 22(1999) no.2, S.198-219
  11. MARC and metadata : METS, MODS, and MARCXML: current and future implications (2004) 0.02 
    0.022620002 = product of:
  0.11310001 = sum of:
    0.11310001 = weight(_text_:22 in 2840) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.11310001 = score(doc=2840,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1827017 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052173212 = queryNorm
        0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 2840, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=2840)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Source
    Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1
  12. Chkhenkeli, T.; Garibashvili, I.: Implementation of the UNIMARC format in Georgian libraries (1998) 0.02 
    0.021906286 = product of:
  0.10953143 = sum of:
    0.10953143 = weight(_text_:21 in 2116) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10953143 = score(doc=2116,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.16162895 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0979297 = idf(docFreq=5425, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052173212 = queryNorm
        0.67767215 = fieldWeight in 2116, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.0979297 = idf(docFreq=5425, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2116)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Date
    1. 7.1996 21:26:02
    Source
    International cataloguing and bibliographic control. 27(1998) no.1, S.21-23
  13. Hopkinson, A.: Traditional communication formats : MARC is far from dead (1999) 0.02 
    0.021906286 = product of:
  0.10953143 = sum of:
    0.10953143 = weight(_text_:21 in 4484) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10953143 = score(doc=4484,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.16162895 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0979297 = idf(docFreq=5425, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052173212 = queryNorm
        0.67767215 = fieldWeight in 4484, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.0979297 = idf(docFreq=5425, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4484)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Date
    1. 7.1996 21:26:02
    Source
    International cataloguing and bibliographic control. 28(1999) no.1, S.17-21
  14. Willer, M.: UNIMARC/Authorities (1999) 0.02 
    0.021906286 = product of:
  0.10953143 = sum of:
    0.10953143 = weight(_text_:21 in 6076) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10953143 = score(doc=6076,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.16162895 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0979297 = idf(docFreq=5425, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052173212 = queryNorm
        0.67767215 = fieldWeight in 6076, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.0979297 = idf(docFreq=5425, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6076)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Date
    1. 7.1996 21:26:02
    2. 8.2001 16:21:16
  15. Gömpel, R.: Standardisierungsarbeit für Bibliotheken : Konzept der Deutschen Bibliothek (2001) 0.02 
    0.021906286 = product of:
  0.10953143 = sum of:
    0.10953143 = weight(_text_:21 in 6128) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10953143 = score(doc=6128,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.16162895 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0979297 = idf(docFreq=5425, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052173212 = queryNorm
        0.67767215 = fieldWeight in 6128, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.0979297 = idf(docFreq=5425, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6128)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Date
    17.12.1996 21:11:09
    27.10.2001 18:21:36
  16. MARC and metadata : METS, MODS, and MARCXML: current and future implications (2004) 0.02 
    0.0197925 = product of:
  0.0989625 = sum of:
    0.0989625 = weight(_text_:22 in 7196) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0989625 = score(doc=7196,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1827017 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052173212 = queryNorm
        0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 7196, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=7196)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Source
    Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1
  17. Geißelmann, F.: Arbeitsergebnisse der Arbeitsgruppe Codes (2000) 0.02 
    0.0197925 = product of:
  0.0989625 = sum of:
    0.0989625 = weight(_text_:22 in 4973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0989625 = score(doc=4973,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1827017 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052173212 = queryNorm
        0.5416616 = 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)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4973)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Date
    26. 8.2000 19:22:35
  18. Weber, R.: "Functional requirements for bibliographic records" und Regelwerksentwicklung (2001) 0.02 
    0.0197925 = product of:
  0.0989625 = sum of:
    0.0989625 = weight(_text_:22 in 6838) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0989625 = score(doc=6838,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1827017 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052173212 = queryNorm
        0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 6838, 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=6838)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Source
    Dialog mit Bibliotheken. 13(2001) H.3, S.20-22
  19. MARC and metadata : METS, MODS, and MARCXML: current and future implications part 2 (2004) 0.02 
    0.0197925 = product of:
  0.0989625 = sum of:
    0.0989625 = weight(_text_:22 in 2841) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0989625 = score(doc=2841,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.1827017 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052173212 = queryNorm
        0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 2841, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2841)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Source
    Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2
  20. Oehlschläger, S.: Aus der 49. Sitzung der Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Verbundsysteme am 23. und 24. November 2005 in Köln (2006) 0.02 
    0.019578729 = product of:
  0.04894682 = sum of:
    0.023955012 = weight(_text_:21 in 632) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023955012 = score(doc=632,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.16162895 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0979297 = idf(docFreq=5425, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052173212 = queryNorm
        0.14820991 = fieldWeight in 632, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.0979297 = idf(docFreq=5425, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=632)
    0.024991807 = weight(_text_:22 in 632) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024991807 = score(doc=632,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.1827017 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.052173212 = queryNorm
        0.13679022 = fieldWeight in 632, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=632)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Content
    MARC21 als Austauschformat Die Expertengruppe Datenformate hat in ihrer 5. Sitzung am 22. November 2005 die Frage der Hierarchienabbildung bei der Übernahme von MARC 21 weiter diskutiert und einer Lösung zugeführt. Für einen geringen Prozentsatz der Daten werden trotz Vorarbeiten der Expertengruppe Probleme bei der Überführung von MARC-21-Daten in MAB2-Strukturen gesehen. Es wurde darauf hingewiesen, dass es im Zusammenhang mit dem Umstieg auf MARC 21 ebenso wie bei der kooperativen Katalogisierung notwendig ist, gemeinsame Regeln festzulegen und Absprachen zwischen den Verbünden zu treffen. Eine unterschiedliche Handhabung des Formats sollte sich von vornherein verbieten. Projekt Kooperative Neukatalogisierung Die Projektgruppe hat zweimal getagt, zuletzt am 3. November 2005. Es liegen erste Ergebnisse vor, und spätestens Anfang Januar 2006 soll das Verfahren erprobt werden. Alle Verbünde signalisieren ihr Interesse an dem geplanten Verfahren, da die Eigenkatalogisierungsrate nach wie vor zu hoch ist. Für die Akzeptanz des Dienstes, der auch zum Synchronisieren der vorhandenen Aufnahmen und zum Austausch von Sacherschließungsdaten genutzt werden soll, ist die Aktualität des geplanten Neukatalogisierungspools essentiell. Ein weiteres Ziel ist auch die Optimierung der Arbeitsabläufe zwischen Verbundzentrale und Bibliotheken. Catalogue Enrichment Zur Anreicherung der Katalogdaten gibt es verschiedene Aktivitäten innerhalb der Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Verbundsysteme, die koordiniert werden müssen, damit eine Mehrfachdigitalisierung von Inhaltsverzeichnissen, Abstracts und anderen Objekten vermieden werden kann. Die Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Verbundsysteme beschließt, eine kleine Arbeitsgruppe einzusetzen, die bis spätestens Anfang Februar 2006 einen Vorschlag mit unterschiedlichen Szenarien für unterschiedliche Umgebungen vorlegen soll. Aufgabe der AG Datenanreicherung ist die Konzeption eines schnellen Dienstes für die Digitalisierung von Abstracts und Inhaltsverzeichnissen sofern sie lizenzrechtlich frei verfügbar sind, die allen Verbünden zur Verfügung gestellt werden sollen. Dazu gehören eine Übersicht über die vorhandenen Daten und eine ausgearbeitete Verfahrensvorschrift für das künftige Vorgehen.
    DDC/Melvil-Nutzungs- und Lizenzsituation Die Deutsche Bibliothek hat den Dienst Melvil vorgestellt, der auf der im Rahmen des Projektes DDC Deutsch erstellten deutschen Übersetzung der 22. Ausgabe der DDC basiert, und die Such- und Sprachgewohnheiten deutschsprachiger Benutzerinnen und Benutzer berücksichtigt. Mit Melvil wurde ein Online-Dienst entwickelt, der Bibliotheken und Informationseinrichtungen außer einem an WebDewey orientierten Klassifikationstool MelvilClass auch ein Retrievaltool MelvilSearch für die verbale Suche nach DDC-erschlossenen Dokumenten und das Browsing in der DDC-Hierarchie zur Verfügung stellt. Über die Schnittstelle MelvilSoap können Bibliotheken und Verbundzentralen, die den Dienst Melvil lizenziert haben, auch DDC-Daten zur weiteren Nutzung herunterladen. Gegenwärtig vergibt Die Deutsche Bibliothek Testlizenzen, ab 2006 kann der Dienst nach einem gestaffelten Modell kostenpflichtig genutzt werden Ergebnisse der Adhoc-Arbeitsgruppe ISBD(CR) Der Standardisierungsausschuss hatte in seiner 9. Sitzung am 15. Dezember 2004 die Anpassung der Splitregeln bei fortlaufenden Sammelwerken an die ISBD(CR) mit dem Ziel der Übernahme beschlossen. Im Januar 2005 richtete die Arbeitsstelle für Standardisierung eine Ad-hoc-AG ISBD(CR) ein, in der Vertreter der ZDB, der Expertengruppe Formalerschließung und der AGDBT (Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Datenbankteilnehmer der ZDB) unter der Federführung der Arbeitsstelle für Standardisierung zusammenarbeiteten. Auftragsgemäß konnte dem Standardisierungsausschuss am 2. August 2005 ein entscheidungsreifer Entwurf zur Anwendung der ISBD(CR)-Splitregeln für fortlaufende Sammelwerke vorgelegt werden. Die Unterlage, die dem Standardisierungsausschuss zu seiner 11. Sitzung am 1. Dezember 2005 zugeleitet wurde, wurde den Mitgliedern der Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Verbundsysteme im Vorfeld der Sitzung zur Kenntnis gegeben. Die zeitnahe Anwendung der ISBD(CR)-Splitregeln würde nicht nur in einem kleinen abgeschlossenen Bereich eine Angleichung an internationale Gepflogenheiten bedeuten, sondern sie hätte auch einige positive Auswirkungen auf die von Zeitschriftentiteln abhängigen ergänzenden Dienstleistungen. So würde z.B. die Verlinkung mit SFX-Diensten erheblich erleichtert."

Authors

Years

Languages

Types

  • a 132
  • m 8
  • s 7
  • x 3
  • b 2
  • el 2
  • r 1
  • More… Less…

Themes