Search (16 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × theme_ss:"Formalerschließung"
  • × theme_ss:"Katalogfragen allgemein"
  1. Managing cataloging and the organization of information : philosophies, practices and challenges at the onset of the 21st century (2000) 0.02 
    0.01733847 = product of:
  0.043346174 = sum of:
    0.018592525 = weight(_text_:online in 238) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018592525 = score(doc=238,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15842392 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05220068 = queryNorm
        0.11735933 = fieldWeight in 238, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=238)
    0.024753649 = weight(_text_:22 in 238) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024753649 = score(doc=238,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18279788 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05220068 = queryNorm
        0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 238, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=238)
  0.4 = coord(2/5)
    Footnote
    Rez. in ZfBB 51(2004) H.1, S.54-55 (G. Pflug): "Unter dem wachsenden Einfluss der Informationstechnologie auf den Bibliotheksbereich nimmt die Katalogisierung eine Schlüsselstellung ein. Das vorliegende Werk gliedert sich in zwei Teile. Der erste Abschnitt ist mit »National Libraries« überschrieben, befasst sich jedoch nur mit der Library of Congress und der National Library of Canada. Ihm folgen Artikel über »Libraries around the world«. Dabei fälltjedoch auf, dass diese Studien zwar Bibliotheken in Großbritannien, Australien, Mittel- und Südamerika und selbst Afrika (Botswana) behandeln, nicht jedoch aus Kontinentaleuropa, trotz entsprechender Aktivitäten etwa in den Niederlanden, in Frankreich oder den deutschsprachigen Ländern. Nur DOBIS/LIBIS wird erwähnt, aber nur, weil es für kurze Zeit die kanadische Entwicklung beeinflusst hat. Im zweiten Teil kommen Katalogisierungsfachleute aus vier Spezial- und neun akademischen Bibliotheken - ausschließlich aus Nordamerika und Großbritannien - zu Wort. So enthält das Werk in 22 Beispielen Berichte über individuelle und regionale Lösungen. Dabei steht die Frage im Vordergrund, zu welchen Änderungen in der Katalogisierungs- und Sacherschließungspraxis die neuen elektronischen Techniken geführt haben. So streben z.B. die englischen Hochschulbibliotheken ein koordiniertes System an. Mit dem Übergang der British Library zu MARC 21 wird das Katalogsystem in Großbritannien nachhaltig beeinflusst - um nur zwei nahe liegende Beispiele zu nennen. Insgesamt werden drei Aspekte behandelt, die Automatisierungstechnik; die dabei einzusetzende Kooperation und das Outsourcing - nicht nur durch Übernahme von Daten anderer Bibliotheken oder durch Verbundsysteme, vor allem der Library of Congress, sondern auch durch Buchhandelsfirmen wie Blackwell North America Authority Control Service. In der Frage der Sacherschließung befassen sich die Beiträge mit den im amerikanischen Bereich üblichen Klassifikationssystemen, vor allem der Colon Classification, Dewey in seinen beiden Formen oder der Library of Congress Classification. Für die deutsche Diskussion sind diese Aspekte vor allem wegen des Übergangs der Deutschen Bibliothek in ihrer Nationalbibliografie zur DDC von großem Interesse (vgl. Magda Heiner-Freiling: Die DDC in der Deutschen Nationalbibliografie. In Dialog mit Bibliotheken. 15. 2003, Nr. 3, S. 8-13). Doch stellen auch die unterschiedlichen Überlegungen zur alphabetischen Katalogisierung, verbunden mit den da zugehörigen Datenbanken, einen interessanten Beitrag zur augenblicklichen Diskussion in Deutschland dar, da auch hier seit einigen Jahren die Katalogisierung nach RAK und ihre Ablösung eine lebhafte Diskussion ausgelöst hat, wie unter anderem der zusammenfassende Beitrag von Elisabeth Niggemann in: Dialog mit Bibliotheken (15. 2003, Nr. 2, S. 4-8) zeigt. Auch die angloamerikanischen und die mit ihnen zum Beispiel in Mexiko, Südamerika oder Australien verbundenen Bibliotheken - das zeigt das Buch deutlich - diskutieren die Frage der alphabetischen Katalogisierung kontrovers. So werden z.B. neben den dominanten AACR-Regeln mit ihrer Weiterentwicklung mehr als zehn andere Katalogisierungssysteme und rund 20 Online-Datenbanken behandelt. Damit liefert das Buch für die Diskussion in Deutschland und die anstehenden Entscheidungen in seiner Grundtendenz wie in den unterschiedlichen-auch widersprüchlichen-Aspekten dereinzelnen Beiträge wertvolle Anregungen."
  2. Treichler, W.: Katalogisierungsregeln, Kataloge und Benützer in schweizerischen Bibliotheken (1986) 0.02 
    0.016973931 = product of:
  0.08486965 = sum of:
    0.08486965 = weight(_text_:22 in 5352) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08486965 = score(doc=5352,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18279788 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05220068 = queryNorm
        0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 5352, 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=5352)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Date
    8.10.2000 14:22:27
  3. Lubetzky, S.: Writings on the classical art of cataloging (2001) 0.02 
    0.016973931 = product of:
  0.08486965 = sum of:
    0.08486965 = weight(_text_:22 in 2622) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08486965 = score(doc=2622,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18279788 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05220068 = queryNorm
        0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 2622, 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=2622)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Footnote
    Rez. in: Technicalities 22(2002) no.1, S.19-20 (S.S. Intner)
  4. Visintin, G.: Passaggi (1998) 0.01 
    0.011315954 = product of:
  0.05657977 = sum of:
    0.05657977 = weight(_text_:22 in 3053) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05657977 = score(doc=3053,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18279788 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05220068 = queryNorm
        0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3053, 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=3053)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Date
    22. 2.1999 20:40:57
  5. Fuller, E.E.: Variation in personal names in works represented in the catalog (1989) 0.01 
    0.010517522 = product of:
  0.052587606 = sum of:
    0.052587606 = weight(_text_:online in 439) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.052587606 = score(doc=439,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.15842392 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05220068 = queryNorm
        0.33194235 = fieldWeight in 439, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=439)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    Recent research suggests that many authority records might be unnecessary in online systems with sophisticated programming. One problem in determining which names can be used without full authority records and the references they provide is that there has been little study of the names themselves, and patterns of variation are unknown. In a random sample of persons with entries in the University of Chicago library general catalog, more than 80% had names appearing in only one form in all works. The study also catagorizes the differences among the forms of those names that do appear in more than one way.
    Footnote
    Simultaneously published as Authority Control in the Online Environment: Considerations and Practices
  6. Kemp, R.: Catalog/cataloging changes and Web 2.0 functionality : new directions for serials (2008) 0.01 
    0.010517522 = product of:
  0.052587606 = sum of:
    0.052587606 = weight(_text_:online in 2254) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.052587606 = score(doc=2254,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.15842392 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05220068 = queryNorm
        0.33194235 = fieldWeight in 2254, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2254)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    This article presents an overview of some of the important recent developments in cataloging theory and practice and online catalog design. Changes in cataloging theory and practice include the incorporation of the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records principles into catalogs, the new Resource Description and Access cataloging manual, and the new CONSER Standard Record. Web 2.0 functionalities and advances in search technology and results displays are influencing online catalog design. The paper ends with hypothetical scenarios in which a catalog, enhanced by the developments described, fulfills the tasks of finding serials articles and titles.
  7. Polidoro, P.: Using qualitative methods to analyze online catalog interfaces (2015) 0.01 
    0.010517522 = product of:
  0.052587606 = sum of:
    0.052587606 = weight(_text_:online in 1879) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.052587606 = score(doc=1879,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.15842392 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05220068 = queryNorm
        0.33194235 = fieldWeight in 1879, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1879)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    Many experts have proposed an evolution toward "next generation catalogs," whose main features are partly inspired by commercial websites such as Google or Amazon. This article examines pros and cons of this integration. It also aims to show how a qualitative approach helps to broaden understanding of web communication mechanisms. After discussing some examples of "next generation catalog" features, I analyze the interface of an online catalog responding to different users' information needs and seeking behaviors. In the conclusion I suggest that the right approach to integration is a "translation" (not a "copy and paste") between commercial and library logics.
  8. Marcum, D.B.: ¬The future of cataloging (2006) 0.01 
    0.009901459 = product of:
  0.049507298 = sum of:
    0.049507298 = weight(_text_:22 in 114) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.049507298 = score(doc=114,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18279788 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05220068 = queryNorm
        0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 114, 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=114)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  9. Theimer, S.: ¬A cataloger's resolution to become more creative : how and why (2012) 0.01 
    0.009901459 = product of:
  0.049507298 = sum of:
    0.049507298 = weight(_text_:22 in 1934) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.049507298 = score(doc=1934,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.18279788 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05220068 = queryNorm
        0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1934, 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=1934)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Date
    29. 5.2015 11:08:22
  10. Riemer, J.J.: CONSER'S aggregator survey and the work of the PCC Task Group (1999) 0.01 
    0.0074370103 = product of:
  0.03718505 = sum of:
    0.03718505 = weight(_text_:online in 5360) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03718505 = score(doc=5360,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15842392 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05220068 = queryNorm
        0.23471867 = fieldWeight in 5360, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5360)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    The author presents the results of the December 1998 CONSER "Survey on Providing Access to Serial Titles within Aggregator Databases." Major findings include 71% of respondents desiring to see full-text serial titles incorporated into the online catalog and nearly 75% interested in acquiring record sets. Also included are an analysis of the numerous survey comments received, strategies toward creating the necessary records and integrating them into OPACs, examples of aggregator analytic records, and other background information on the work of the Program for Cooperative Cataloging's Task Group on Journals in Aggregator Databases.
  11. Cossham, A.F.: Models of the bibliographic universe (2017) 0.01 
    0.0074370103 = product of:
  0.03718505 = sum of:
    0.03718505 = weight(_text_:online in 3817) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03718505 = score(doc=3817,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15842392 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05220068 = queryNorm
        0.23471867 = fieldWeight in 3817, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3817)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    What kinds of mental models do library catalogue users have of the bibliographic universe in an age of online and electronic information? Using phenomenography and grounded analysis, it identifies participants' understanding, experience, and conceptualisation of the bibliographic universe, and identifies their expectations when using library catalogues. It contrasts participants' mental models with existing LIS models, and explores the nature of the bibliographic universe. The bibliographic universe can be considered to be a social object that exists because it is inscribed in catalogue records, cataloguing codes, bibliographies, and other bibliographic tools. It is a socially constituted phenomenon.
  12. Rijk Spanhoff, E. de: Principle issues : catalog paradigms, old and new (2002) 0.01 
    0.0063745803 = product of:
  0.031872902 = sum of:
    0.031872902 = weight(_text_:online in 5481) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.031872902 = score(doc=5481,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15842392 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05220068 = queryNorm
        0.20118743 = fieldWeight in 5481, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5481)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    Recent attempts to assess the adequacy of AACR as a descriptive cataloging code for the online environment have focused attention on cataloging principles. This paper looks at some old and new attempts to isolate the fundamental principles underlying AACR. It considers catalog objectives, principles, and rules and looks at how these relate to one another. It analyzes the relationship of these principles and rules to the final product, the library catalog, pointing out differences (in this regard) between catalogs that are paper-based and those that are electronic. Finally, it comments on the present effort of the Joint Steering Committee for Revision of AACR to formulate a statement of principles to be included in a new introduction to AACR.
  13. Babeu, A.: Building a "FRBR-inspired" catalog : the Perseus digital library experience (2008) 0.01 
    0.0060100122 = product of:
  0.03005006 = sum of:
    0.03005006 = weight(_text_:online in 2429) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03005006 = score(doc=2429,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.15842392 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05220068 = queryNorm
        0.18968134 = fieldWeight in 2429, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, 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.
    Our catalog should not be called a FRBR catalog perhaps, but instead a "FRBR Inspired catalog." As such our main goal has been "practical findability," we are seeking to support the four identified user tasks of the FRBR model, or to "Search, Identify, Select, and Obtain," rather than to create a FRBR catalog, per se. By encoding as much information as possible in the MODS and MADS records we have created, we believe that useful searching will be supported, that by using unique identifiers for works and authors users will be able to identify that the entity they have located is the desired one, that by encoding expression level information (such as the language of the work, the translator, etc) users will be able to select which expression of a work they are interested in, and that by supplying links to different online manifestations that users will be able to obtain access to a digital copy of a work. This white paper will discuss previous and current efforts by the Perseus Project in creating a FRBRized catalog, including the cataloging workflow, lessons learned during the process and will also seek to place this work in the larger context of research regarding FRBR, cataloging, Library 2.0 and the Semantic Web, and the growing importance of the FRBR model in the face of growing million book digital libraries.
  14. Byrd, J.; Charbonneau, G.; Charbonneau, M.; Courtney, A.; Johnson, E.; Leonard, K.; Morrison, A.; Mudge, S.; O'Bryan, A.; Opasik, S.; Riley, J.; Turchyn, S.: ¬A white paper on the future of cataloging at Indiana University (2006) 0.01 
    0.00531215 = product of:
  0.02656075 = sum of:
    0.02656075 = weight(_text_:online in 3225) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02656075 = score(doc=3225,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15842392 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05220068 = queryNorm
        0.16765618 = fieldWeight in 3225, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3225)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    This is a report by a group "charged to identify current trends that will have a direct impact on cataloging operations and to define possible new roles for the online catalog and cataloging staff at Indiana University." Their one general conclusion after nine months of work is that "The need for cataloging expertise within the I.U. Libraries will not be diminished in the coming years. Rather, catalogers of the future will work in the evolving environment of publishing, scholarly communication, and information technology in new expanded roles. Catalogers will need to be key players in addressing the many challenges facing the libraries and the overall management and organization of information at Indiana University." The report also identifies five strategic directions. The report is an interesting read, and taken with the explosion of related reports (e.g., Calhoun's report to the Library of Congress cited in this issue, the UC Bibliographic Services TF Report), adds yet another perspective to the kinds of changes we must foster to create better library services in a vastly changed environment.
  15. Wakeling, S.; Clough, P.; Connaway, L.S.; Sen, B.; Tomás, D.: Users and uses of a global union catalog : a mixed-methods study of WorldCat.org (2017) 0.01 
    0.00531215 = product of:
  0.02656075 = sum of:
    0.02656075 = weight(_text_:online in 3794) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02656075 = score(doc=3794,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15842392 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05220068 = queryNorm
        0.16765618 = fieldWeight in 3794, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3794)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    This paper presents the first large-scale investigation of the users and uses of WorldCat.org, the world's largest bibliographic database and global union catalog. Using a mixed-methods approach involving focus group interviews with 120 participants, an online survey with 2,918 responses, and an analysis of transaction logs of approximately 15 million sessions from WorldCat.org, the study provides a new understanding of the context for global union catalog use. We find that WorldCat.org is accessed by a diverse population, with the three primary user groups being librarians, students, and academics. Use of the system is found to fall within three broad types of work-task (professional, academic, and leisure), and we also present an emergent taxonomy of search tasks that encompass known-item, unknown-item, and institutional information searches. Our results support the notion that union catalogs are primarily used for known-item searches, although the volume of traffic to WorldCat.org means that unknown-item searches nonetheless represent an estimated 250,000 sessions per month. Search engine referrals account for almost half of all traffic, but although WorldCat.org effectively connects users referred from institutional library catalogs to other libraries holding a sought item, users arriving from a search engine are less likely to connect to a library.
  16. Wessel, H.-P.: RSWK und RAK - die Geschichte einer unendlichen Annäherung? (2005) 0.00 
    0.00424972 = product of:
  0.0212486 = sum of:
    0.0212486 = weight(_text_:online in 3666) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0212486 = score(doc=3666,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.15842392 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
          0.05220068 = queryNorm
        0.13412495 = fieldWeight in 3666, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0349014 = idf(docFreq=5778, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3666)
  0.2 = coord(1/5)
    Abstract
    "Für die Schlagwortkatalogisierungsregeln ist im Bereich der Ansetzung von Personennamen, Körperschaftsnamen und Titeln, in denen sie sich mit den Formalkatalogisierungsregeln überlappen, eine Konformität mit diesen aus verschiedenen Gründen sehr wünschenswert, wenn nicht geboten."' Diese These von Peter Baader, seinerzeit Leiter der Abteilung Alphabetische Katalogisierung der Deutschen Bibliothek, stammt aus der Zeit vor dem Erscheinen der ersten Auflage (1986) der RSWK und ist heute immer noch genauso aktuell wie im Jahre 1983. Baader warnte vor einer "Zersplitterung" der jeweiligen Regelungen, konnte diese jedoch nicht verhindern, da die RSWK sich letztlich auf etablierte deutsche Schlagwortregelwerke und die Ergebnisse von Abstimmungen durch deutsche Bibliotheksverbünde und Einzelbibliotheken beriefen. Dies geschah nicht zuletzt, um die Akzeptanz der RSWK als neues Einheitsregelwerk zu erhöhen. Zwanzig Jahre später diskutiert die deutschsprachige bibliothekarische Fachwelt endlich ergebnisorientiert über die Angleichung von RAK und RSWK, jetzt allerdings unter Anpassung der RAK an Struktur und Inhalte der Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules (AACR) bzw. ihres Nachfolgers. Die folgende Darstellung unternimmt den Versuch, auf der Grundlage dieser Prämisse das Modell eines für die Formal- und Inhaltserschließung gemeinsamen deutschen Regelwerks zu skizzieren und die noch bestehenden Unterschiede zu dokumentieren. Zum besseren Verständnis des doch so langwierigen Annäherungsprozesses soll zunächst die bisherige Entwicklung betrachtet werden. Eckpunkte der Vorgeschichte - Die DBI-Kommission für Erschließung und Katalogmanagement (KEK) beschließt 1991 in ihrem Arbeitsprogramm den Abgleich beider Regelwerke und erklärt 1992 ihre Absicht, die Ansetzungen der Personennamen in RAK und RSWK zu harmonisieren. - Die Expertengruppe Online-Kataloge empfiehlt 1994 einheitliche Ansetzungsformen in RAK und RSWK für Personen- bzw. Körperschaftsnamen sowie eine umfassende Bestimmung von Einheitssachtiteln. - Die Expertengruppen RAK und RSWK beschließen 1996, dass bei der Ansetzung von Personen- und Körperschaftsnamen substanzielle Abweichungen zwischen den beiden Regelwerken vorläufig erhalten bleiben und stattdessen unterschiedliche Ansetzungsformen miteinander verknüpft werden sollen. Kurz nach dem Beginn der Diskussion über einen möglichen Umstieg auf internationale Formate und Regelwerke (MARC 21, AACR2) fasst der Standardisierungsausschuss im Juni 2002 den Beschluss zur Angleichung von RAK und RSWK. Ausgangspunkt sollen die Ansetzungsformen von Personen und Körperschaften sein. Im Dezember 2002 wird von einem RAK-RSWK-Expertentreffen vorgeschlagen, bei Regeländerungen die AACR2 zu berücksichtigen, ein gemeinsames Datenformat für PND, GKD und SWD zu entwickeln, den Änderungsaufwand in den Normdateien abzuschätzen und einen Zeitplan für ein gestuftes Vorgehen bei den Regeländerungen zu entwickeln. Im Mai 2004 beschließen die Expertengruppen Formalerschließung, PND und RSWK/SWD bei getrennten und überwiegend unterschiedlichen Regelwerkstexten einheitliche Ansetzungsformen in RAK und RSWK für Personennamen. Der Standardisierungsausschuss erklärt seine Absicht, einen für Formal- und Inhaltserschließung gemeinsamen Regelwerkstext zu veröffentlichen. Im Januar 2005 wird von Vertretern der Expertengruppen ein von der Arbeitsstelle für Standardisierung vorgelegtes Arbeitspaket "Gemeinsame Ansetzungsregeln für Körperschaften" (GKR) beschlossen. Im März 2005 legt die Arbeitsstelle für Standardisierung ein Konzept zur Entwicklung eines gemeinsamen Normdatenformats vor.

Authors

Years

Languages

Types

Themes