Search (4 results, page 1 of 1)

0.07879403 = product of:
  0.2363821 = sum of:
    0.2363821 = weight(_text_:title in 6437) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.2363821 = score(doc=6437,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.27436262 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.570018 = idf(docFreq=457, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049257044 = queryNorm
        0.86156815 = fieldWeight in 6437, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.570018 = idf(docFreq=457, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6437)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

0.045025162 = product of:
  0.13507548 = sum of:
    0.13507548 = weight(_text_:title in 3446) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.13507548 = score(doc=3446,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.27436262 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.570018 = idf(docFreq=457, maxDocs=44218)
          0.049257044 = queryNorm
        0.49232465 = fieldWeight in 3446, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.570018 = idf(docFreq=457, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3446)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

A survey of Japanese OPACs available on the Internet was conducted relating to use of keywords for subject access. The findings suggest that present OPACs are not capable of storing subject-oriented information. Currently available keyword access derives from a merely title-based retrieval system. Contents data should be added to bibliographic records as an efficient way of providing subject access, and costings for this process should be estimated. Word standardisation issues must also be addressed

0.028425425 = product of:
  0.085276276 = sum of:
    0.085276276 = product of:
      0.17055255 = sum of:
        0.17055255 = weight(_text_:catalogue in 753) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.17055255 = score(doc=753,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.23806341 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049257044 = queryNorm
            0.7164165 = fieldWeight in 753, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              4.8330836 = idf(docFreq=956, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=753)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

Describes a study conducted to compare the use of a new OPAC with that of the card catalogue looking primarily at the area of subject access. Library science students at a private university were asked to respond to questions concerning: the number of subject searches and searches for specific items that they carried out on the OPAC and on the card catalogue; the success rate of the catalogue searches; how the search was carried out (classification number or keywords); librarian assistance required; and knowledge of the Nippon Decimal Classification. Results revealed that while there was an increase in the number of users as a result of the introduction of OPAC facilities, there were certain aspects which required attention such as the area of subject searches

0.0088982 = product of:
  0.026694598 = sum of:
    0.026694598 = product of:
      0.053389195 = sum of:
        0.053389195 = weight(_text_:22 in 867) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.053389195 = score(doc=867,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.17248978 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.049257044 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 867, 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=867)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(1/3)

Abstract

The Nippon Decimal Classification (NDC) system, extensively used in Japanese libraries, was devised in 1929. It is difficult to use NDC to classify world literature, such as fiction in English by non American, non British writers. This is not necessarily straightforward in other classification schemes but a survey of 40 Japanese university libraries, of which 24 responded, showed remarkable inconsistencies in the treatment of 22 world literature authors. NDC clearly needs updating to deal with this problem