Search (5 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × type_ss:"el"
  • × type_ss:"r"
  1. De Rosa, C.; Cantrell, J.; Cellentani, D.; Hawk, J.; Jenkins, L.; Wilson, A.: Perceptions of libraries and information resources : A Report to the OCLC Membership (2005) 0.02
    0.015863424 = product of:
      0.079317115 = sum of:
        0.079317115 = weight(_text_:books in 5018) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.079317115 = score(doc=5018,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.24756333 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051222645 = queryNorm
            0.3203912 = fieldWeight in 5018, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5018)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Abstract
    Summarizes findings of an international study on information-seeking habits and preferences: With extensive input from hundreds of librarians and OCLC staff, the OCLC Market Research team developed a project and commissioned Harris Interactive Inc. to survey a representative sample of information consumers. In June of 2005, we collected over 3,300 responses from information consumers in Australia, Canada, India, Singapore, the United Kingdom and the United States. The Perceptions report provides the findings and responses from the online survey in an effort to learn more about: * Library use * Awareness and use of library electronic resources * Free vs. for-fee information * The "Library" brand The findings indicate that information consumers view libraries as places to borrow print books, but they are unaware of the rich electronic content they can access through libraries. Even though information consumers make limited use of these resources, they continue to trust libraries as reliable sources of information.
  2. Calhoun, K.: ¬The changing nature of the catalog and its integration with other discovery tools : Prepared for the Library of Congress (2006) 0.01
    0.014956179 = product of:
      0.0747809 = sum of:
        0.0747809 = weight(_text_:books in 5013) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0747809 = score(doc=5013,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.24756333 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051222645 = queryNorm
            0.30206773 = fieldWeight in 5013, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=5013)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Abstract
    The destabilizing influences of the Web, widespread ownership of personal computers, and rising computer literacy have created an era of discontinuous change in research libraries a time when the cumulated assets of the past do not guarantee future success. The library catalog is such an asset. Today, a large and growing number of students and scholars routinely bypass library catalogs in favor of other discovery tools, and the catalog represents a shrinking proportion of the universe of scholarly information. The catalog is in decline, its processes and structures are unsustainable, and change needs to be swift. At the same time, books and serials are not dead, and they are not yet digital. Notwithstanding widespread expansion of digitization projects, ubiquitous e-journals, and a market that seems poised to move to e-books, the role of catalog records in discovery and retrieval of the world's library collections seems likely to continue for at least a couple of decades and probably longer. This report, commissioned by the Library of Congress (LC), offers an analysis of the current situation, options for revitalizing research library catalogs, a feasibility assessment, a vision for change, and a blueprint for action. Library decision makers are the primary audience for this report, whose aim is to elicit support, dialogue, collaboration, and movement toward solutions. Readers from the business community, particularly those that directly serve libraries, may find the report helpful for defining research and development efforts. The same is true for readers from membership organizations such as OCLC Online Computer Library Center, the Research Libraries Group, the Association for Research Libraries, the Council on Library and Information Resources, the Coalition for Networked Information, and the Digital Library Federation. Library managers and practitioners from all functional groups are likely to take an interest in the interview findings and in specific actions laid out in the blueprint.
  3. Drewer, P.; Massion, F; Pulitano, D: Was haben Wissensmodellierung, Wissensstrukturierung, künstliche Intelligenz und Terminologie miteinander zu tun? (2017) 0.01
    0.013879924 = product of:
      0.06939962 = sum of:
        0.06939962 = weight(_text_:22 in 5576) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.06939962 = score(doc=5576,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17937298 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051222645 = queryNorm
            0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 5576, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5576)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Date
    13.12.2017 14:17:22
  4. Babeu, A.: Building a "FRBR-inspired" catalog : the Perseus digital library experience (2008) 0.01
    0.010575616 = product of:
      0.052878078 = sum of:
        0.052878078 = weight(_text_:books in 2429) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.052878078 = score(doc=2429,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.24756333 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051222645 = queryNorm
            0.21359414 = fieldWeight in 2429, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2429)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Abstract
    If one follows any of the major cataloging or library blogs these days, it is obvious that the topic of FRBR (Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records) has increasingly become one of major significance for the library community. What began as a proposed conceptual entity-relationship model for improving the structure of bibliographic records has become a hotly debated topic with many tangled threads that have implications not just for cataloging but for many aspects of libraries and librarianship. In the fall of 2005, the Perseus Project experimented with creating a FRBRized catalog for its current online classics collection, a collection that consists of several hundred classical texts in Greek and Latin as well as reference works and scholarly commentaries regarding these works. In the last two years, with funding from the Mellon Foundation, Perseus has amassed and digitized a growing collection of classical texts (some as image books on our own servers that will eventually be made available through Fedora), and some available through the Open Content Alliance (OCA)2, and created FRBRized cataloging data for these texts. This work was done largely as an experiment to see the potential of the FRBR model for creating a specialized catalog for classics.
  5. Förderung von Informationsinfrastrukturen für die Wissenschaft : Ein Positionspapier der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft (2018) 0.01
    0.006939962 = product of:
      0.03469981 = sum of:
        0.03469981 = weight(_text_:22 in 4178) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03469981 = score(doc=4178,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17937298 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.051222645 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 4178, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4178)
      0.2 = coord(1/5)
    
    Date
    22. 3.2018 17:30:43