Petrucciani, A.: Quality of library catalogs and value of (good) catalogs (2015)
0.02
0.018507326 = product of:
0.09253663 = sum of:
0.09253663 = weight(_text_:books in 1878) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09253663 = score(doc=1878,freq=2.0), product of:
0.24756333 = queryWeight, product of:
4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
0.051222645 = queryNorm
0.37378973 = fieldWeight in 1878, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1878)
0.2 = coord(1/5)
- Abstract
- The quality of large catalogs is uneven and often low, but this issue is underrated and understudied. Library catalogs often fail to communicate correct and clear information to users and their low quality is not simply due to faults, duplications, and so on but also to unwise cataloging standards and policies. While there is plenty of uncontrolled information about books and other publications, the need for good-quality bibliographic information is apparent and library catalogs may provide a trustworthy map of the publishing output, with full control of editions, works, authors, and so on and effective navigation functions, which are lacking in today's information-rich environment.
