Search (45 results, page 1 of 3)

  • × author_ss:"Zumer, M."
  1. Mitchell, J.S.; Zeng, M.L.; Zumer, M.: Modeling classification systems in multicultural and multilingual contexts (2012) 0.05 
    0.045787815 = product of:
  0.16025734 = sum of:
    0.044100422 = weight(_text_:subject in 1967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.044100422 = score(doc=1967,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.41066417 = fieldWeight in 1967, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1967)
    0.049448926 = weight(_text_:classification in 1967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.049448926 = score(doc=1967,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.5171319 = fieldWeight in 1967, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1967)
    0.049448926 = weight(_text_:classification in 1967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.049448926 = score(doc=1967,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.5171319 = fieldWeight in 1967, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1967)
    0.017259069 = product of:
      0.034518138 = sum of:
        0.034518138 = weight(_text_:22 in 1967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034518138 = score(doc=1967,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.32829654 = fieldWeight in 1967, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1967)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(4/14)
    Abstract
    This paper reports on the second part of an initiative of the authors on researching classification systems with the conceptual model defined by the Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data (FRSAD) final report. In an earlier study, the authors explored whether the FRSAD conceptual model could be extended beyond subject authority data to model classification data. The focus of the current study is to determine if classification data modeled using FRSAD can be used to solve real-world discovery problems in multicultural and multilingual contexts. The paper discusses the relationships between entities (same type or different types) in the context of classification systems that involve multiple translations and /or multicultural implementations. Results of two case studies are presented in detail: (a) two instances of the DDC (DDC 22 in English, and the Swedish-English mixed translation of DDC 22), and (b) Chinese Library Classification. The use cases of conceptual models in practice are also discussed.
    Source
    Beyond libraries - subject metadata in the digital environment and semantic web. IFLA Satellite Post-Conference, 17-18 August 2012, Tallinn
  2. Zumer, M.; Zeng, M.L.: Application of FRBR and FRSAD to classification systems (2015) 0.04 
    0.04474069 = product of:
  0.15659241 = sum of:
    0.042435654 = weight(_text_:subject in 2284) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042435654 = score(doc=2284,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.39516178 = fieldWeight in 2284, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2284)
    0.044509117 = weight(_text_:classification in 2284) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.044509117 = score(doc=2284,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.46547192 = fieldWeight in 2284, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2284)
    0.02513852 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2284) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02513852 = score(doc=2284,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.21506234 = fieldWeight in 2284, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2284)
    0.044509117 = weight(_text_:classification in 2284) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.044509117 = score(doc=2284,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.46547192 = fieldWeight in 2284, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2284)
  0.2857143 = coord(4/14)
    Abstract
    The Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data (FRSAD) conceptual model defines entities, attributes and relationships as they relate to subject authority data. FRSAD includes two main entities, thema (any entity used as the subject of a work) and nomen (any sign or arrangement of signs that a thema is known by, referred to, or addressed as). In a given controlled vocabulary and within a domain, a nomen is the appellation of only one thema. The authors consider the question: can the FRSAD conceptual model be extended beyond controlled vocabularies (its original focus) to model classification data? Models that are developed based on the structures and functions of controlled vocabularies (such as thesauri and subject heading systems) often need to be adjusted or extended to accommodate classification systems that have been developed with different focused functions, structures and fundamental theories. The Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) system and Universal Decimal Classification (UDC) are used as a case study to test applicability of the FRSAD model for classification data and the applicability of the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) for modelling versions, such as different adaptations and different language editions.
    Source
    Classification and authority control: expanding resource discovery: proceedings of the International UDC Seminar 2015, 29-30 October 2015, Lisbon, Portugal. Eds.: Slavic, A. u. M.I. Cordeiro
  3. Mitchell, J.S.; Zeng, M.L.; Zumer, M.: Modeling classification systems in multicultural and multilingual contexts (2014) 0.04 
    0.041799262 = product of:
  0.14629741 = sum of:
    0.03675035 = weight(_text_:subject in 1962) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03675035 = score(doc=1962,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.34222013 = fieldWeight in 1962, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1962)
    0.04758225 = weight(_text_:classification in 1962) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04758225 = score(doc=1962,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.49761042 = fieldWeight in 1962, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1962)
    0.04758225 = weight(_text_:classification in 1962) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04758225 = score(doc=1962,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.49761042 = fieldWeight in 1962, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1962)
    0.014382556 = product of:
      0.028765112 = sum of:
        0.028765112 = weight(_text_:22 in 1962) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.028765112 = score(doc=1962,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.27358043 = fieldWeight in 1962, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1962)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(4/14)
    Abstract
    This article reports on the second part of an initiative of the authors on researching classification systems with the conceptual model defined by the Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data (FRSAD) final report. In an earlier study, the authors explored whether the FRSAD conceptual model could be extended beyond subject authority data to model classification data. The focus of the current study is to determine if classification data modeled using FRSAD can be used to solve real-world discovery problems in multicultural and multilingual contexts. The article discusses the relationships between entities (same type or different types) in the context of classification systems that involve multiple translations and/or multicultural implementations. Results of two case studies are presented in detail: (a) two instances of the Dewey Decimal Classification [DDC] (DDC 22 in English, and the Swedish-English mixed translation of DDC 22), and (b) Chinese Library Classification. The use cases of conceptual models in practice are also discussed.
    Footnote
    Contribution in a special issue "Beyond libraries: Subject metadata in the digital environment and Semantic Web" - Enthält Beiträge der gleichnamigen IFLA Satellite Post-Conference, 17-18 August 2012, Tallinn.
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 52(2014) no.1, S.90-101
  4. Riesthuis, G.J.A.; Zumer, M.: FRBR and FRANAR : subject access (2004) 0.04 
    0.035982512 = product of:
  0.12593879 = sum of:
    0.058800567 = weight(_text_:subject in 2646) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.058800567 = score(doc=2646,freq=24.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.5475522 = fieldWeight in 2646, product of:
          4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
            24.0 = termFreq=24.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2646)
    0.013458292 = weight(_text_:classification in 2646) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013458292 = score(doc=2646,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.14074548 = fieldWeight in 2646, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2646)
    0.04022163 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2646) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04022163 = score(doc=2646,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.34409973 = fieldWeight in 2646, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2646)
    0.013458292 = weight(_text_:classification in 2646) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013458292 = score(doc=2646,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.14074548 = fieldWeight in 2646, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=2646)
  0.2857143 = coord(4/14)
    Abstract
    In the last decade a discussion has been going an in the Division of Bibliographic Control of the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA) about the principles of cataloguing. This discussion was initiated by the widespread replacement of the card and list catalogues by Online Public Access Catalogues (OPACs) since 1980. In this paper we discuss the role of subject cataloguing in three important documents that are the results of this discussion. Our conclusion is that the interest in subject cataloguing has grown remarkably, but is still not an the level it deserves given the fact that a great part of all searches in OPACs are subject oriented.
    Content
    1. Introduction In this paper we address two questions: 1. What is the position of subject indexing in the thinking of the library world after the publication of the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (1998)? 2. Is this position in accordance with the requirements of the users searching for documents about a given subject? Research Shows that searching an a topic (i.e. subject access) is an important, even predominant type of end-user searching of library catalogues and even more so of other bibliographic databases. Between one third and two thirds of all OPAC searches are probably subject searches (Large & Beheshti, 199%). Taking into account different ways in which searching an a topic is implemented in library catalogues (subject headings, classification, keywords only) the percentage may be even higher. For example title word searching may be a substitute for subject searching if no better tools are available. In the light of this it is not surprising that the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) (1998) pays attention to subject searching, as well as the Functional Requirements and Numbering of Authority Records (FRANAR) (2003). Also the Statement of International Cataloguing Principles: Final draft of 19 December 2003, which is the result of the first First IFLA Meeting of Experts an an International Cataloguing Code mentiong subject access as a function of cataloguing (Statement, 2003). In this paper we discuss the ways these three documents deal with subjects.
  5. Zumer, M.: Dedication [to Zlata Dimec] (2004) 0.03 
    0.0302319 = product of:
  0.1410822 = sum of:
    0.04037488 = weight(_text_:classification in 4184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04037488 = score(doc=4184,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.42223644 = fieldWeight in 4184, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4184)
    0.060332447 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 4184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.060332447 = score(doc=4184,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.5161496 = fieldWeight in 4184, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4184)
    0.04037488 = weight(_text_:classification in 4184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04037488 = score(doc=4184,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.42223644 = fieldWeight in 4184, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=4184)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Series
    Cataloging and classification quarterly; 39, nos.3/4
    Source
    Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR): hype or cure-all. Ed. by P. le Boeuf,
  6. Dimec, Z.; Zumer, M.; Riesthuis, G.J.A.: Slovenian cataloguing practice and Functional Requirements for Bibliography Records : a comparative analysis (2004) 0.03 
    0.030040171 = product of:
  0.1051406 = sum of:
    0.021217827 = weight(_text_:subject in 5857) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021217827 = score(doc=5857,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.19758089 = fieldWeight in 5857, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5857)
    0.016822865 = weight(_text_:classification in 5857) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016822865 = score(doc=5857,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.17593184 = fieldWeight in 5857, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5857)
    0.05027704 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 5857) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.05027704 = score(doc=5857,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.43012467 = fieldWeight in 5857, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5857)
    0.016822865 = weight(_text_:classification in 5857) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016822865 = score(doc=5857,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.17593184 = fieldWeight in 5857, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5857)
  0.2857143 = coord(4/14)
    Abstract
    The IFLA study Functional requirements for bibliographic records (FRBR) set a new frame for both cataloguing codes and subject analysis. The Paris Principles defined the functions of the catalogue followed by both cataloguing codes used in Slovenia: P. Kalan's Abecedni imenski katalog and E. Verona's Pravilnik i prirunik za izradbe abecednih kataloga. FRBR defines the functions for records themselves, irrespective of the type of the database consisting of these records. Compared to the requirements for the national bibliographic records as defined by FRBR, the records belonging to the Slovenian national bibliography show more descriptive elements and less notes on bibliographic history, which reflects in lack of uniform titles. As the uniform title itself enables the identification of related works and their expressions, this practice does not satisfy the FRBR requirements. Differences in the extent of records for different types of material derive from decentralised processing at the National and University Library. It is therefore necessary to establish uniform criteria for both the materials included into the Slovenian national bibliography, and the extent of data elements.
    Series
    Cataloging and classification quarterly; 39, nos.3/4
    Source
    Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR): hype or cure-all. Ed. by P. le Boeuf,
  7. Mitchell, J.S.; Zeng, M.L.; Zumer, M.: Extending models for controlled vocabularies to classification systems : modeling DDC with FRSAD (2011) 0.03 
    0.02816869 = product of:
  0.13145389 = sum of:
    0.042435654 = weight(_text_:subject in 4092) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042435654 = score(doc=4092,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.39516178 = fieldWeight in 4092, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4092)
    0.044509117 = weight(_text_:classification in 4092) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.044509117 = score(doc=4092,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.46547192 = fieldWeight in 4092, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4092)
    0.044509117 = weight(_text_:classification in 4092) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.044509117 = score(doc=4092,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.46547192 = fieldWeight in 4092, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4092)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    The Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data (FRSAD) conceptual model identifies entities, attributes and relationships as they relate to subject authority data. FRSAD includes two main entities, thema (any entity used as a subject of a work) and nomen (any sign or sequence of signs that a thema is known by, referred to, or addressed as). In a given controlled vocabulary and within a domain, a nomen is the appellation of only one thema. The authors consider the question, can the FRSAD conceptual model be extended beyond controlled vocabularies (its original focus) to model classification data? Models that are developed based on the structures and functions of controlled vocabularies (such as thesauri and subject heading systems) often need to be adjusted or extended to accommodate classification systems that have been developed with different focused functions, structures and fundamental theories. The Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) system is used as a case study to test applicability of the FRSAD model for classification data, and as a springboard for a general discussion of issues related to the use of FRSAD for the representation of classification data.
    Content
    EPC Exhibit 134-25.1; May 13, 2011. To be presented at Classification & Ontology: Formal Approaches and Access to Knowledge, The Hague, 19-20 September 2011.
  8. Mitchell, J.S.; Zeng, M.L.; Zumer, M.: Extending models for controlled vocabularies to classification systems : modelling DDC with FRSAD (2011) 0.03 
    0.02816869 = product of:
  0.13145389 = sum of:
    0.042435654 = weight(_text_:subject in 4828) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.042435654 = score(doc=4828,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.39516178 = fieldWeight in 4828, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4828)
    0.044509117 = weight(_text_:classification in 4828) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.044509117 = score(doc=4828,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.46547192 = fieldWeight in 4828, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4828)
    0.044509117 = weight(_text_:classification in 4828) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.044509117 = score(doc=4828,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.46547192 = fieldWeight in 4828, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=4828)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    The Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data (FRSAD) conceptual model identifies entities, attributes and relationships as they relate to subject authority data. FRSAD includes two main entities, thema (any entity used as a subject of a work) and nomen (any sign or sequence of signs that a thema is known by, referred to, or addressed as). In a given controlled vocabulary and within a domain, a nomen is the appellation of only one thema. The authors consider the question, can the FRSAD conceptual model be extended beyond controlled vocabularies (its original focus) to model classification data? Models that are developed based on the structures and functions of controlled vocabularies (such as thesauri and subject heading systems) often need to be adjusted or extended to accommodate classification systems that have been developed with different focused functions, structures and fundamental theories. The Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) system is used as a case study to test applicability of the FRSAD model for classification data, and as a springboard for a general discussion of issues related to the use of FRSAD for the representation of classification data.
    Source
    Classification and ontology: formal approaches and access to knowledge: proceedings of the International UDC Seminar, 19-20 September 2011, The Hague, The Netherlands. Eds.: A. Slavic u. E. Civallero
  9. Zumer, M.; Zeng, M.L.; Salaba, A.: FRSAD: conceptual modeling of aboutness (2012) 0.03 
    0.02693485 = product of:
  0.12569596 = sum of:
    0.07859193 = weight(_text_:subject in 1960) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07859193 = score(doc=1960,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.73184985 = fieldWeight in 1960, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1960)
    0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1960) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023552012 = score(doc=1960,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1960, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1960)
    0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1960) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023552012 = score(doc=1960,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1960, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1960)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    This book offers the first comprehensive exploration of the development and use of the International Federation of Library Association's newly released model for subject authority data, covering everything from the rationale for creating the model to practical steps for implementing it.
    Footnote
    Rez. in: Cataloging and classification quarterly 52(2014) no.3, S.343-346 (T. Brenndorfer)
    LCSH
    FRSAD (Conceptual model) / Subject headings
    RSWK
    Datenmodell / Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data
    Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data / Inhaltserschließung
    Subject
    Datenmodell / Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data
    Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data / Inhaltserschließung
    FRSAD (Conceptual model) / Subject headings
  10. Zumer, M.; Zeng, M.L.; Mitchell, J.S.: FRBRizing KOS relationships : applying the FRBR model to versions of the DDC (2012) 0.03 
    0.025810115 = product of:
  0.1204472 = sum of:
    0.045140486 = weight(_text_:classification in 846) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.045140486 = score(doc=846,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.4720747 = fieldWeight in 846, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=846)
    0.030166224 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 846) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.030166224 = score(doc=846,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.2580748 = fieldWeight in 846, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=846)
    0.045140486 = weight(_text_:classification in 846) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.045140486 = score(doc=846,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.4720747 = fieldWeight in 846, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=846)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    The paper presents the approach of using the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) model to investigate the complicated sets of relationships among different versions of a classification system for the purposes of specifying provenance of classification data and facilitating collaborative efforts for using and reusing classification data, particularly in a linked data setting. The long-term goal of this research goes beyond the Dewey Decimal Classification that is used as a case. It addresses the questions of if and how the modelling approach and the FRBR-based model itself can be generalized and applied to other classification systems, multilingual and multicultural vocabularies, and even non-KOS resources that share similar characteristics.
  11. Landry, P.; Zumer, M.; Clavel-Merrin, G.: Report on cross-language subject access options (2006) 0.02 
    0.024083693 = product of:
  0.11239056 = sum of:
    0.07201569 = weight(_text_:subject in 2433) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07201569 = score(doc=2433,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.67061174 = fieldWeight in 2433, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2433)
    0.02018744 = weight(_text_:classification in 2433) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02018744 = score(doc=2433,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 2433, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2433)
    0.02018744 = weight(_text_:classification in 2433) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02018744 = score(doc=2433,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 2433, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2433)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    This report presents the results of desk-top based study of projects and initiatives in the area of linking and mapping subject tools. While its goal is to provide areas of further study for cross-language subject access in the European Library, and specifically the national libraries of the Ten New Member States, it is not restricted to cross-language mappings since some of the tools used to create links across thesauri or subject headings in the same language may also be appropriate for cross-language mapping. Tools reviewed have been selected to represent a variety of approaches (e.g. subject heading to subject heading, thesaurus to thesaurus, classification to subject heading) reflecting the variety of subject access tools in use in the European Library. The results show that there is no single solution that would be appropriate for all libraries but that parts of several initiatives may be applicable on a technical, organisational or content level.
  12. Svab, K.; Zumer, M.: ¬The value of a library catalog for selecting children's picture books (2015) 0.02 
    0.023156079 = product of:
  0.1080617 = sum of:
    0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 2614) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023552012 = score(doc=2614,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 2614, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2614)
    0.060957674 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2614) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.060957674 = score(doc=2614,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.52149844 = fieldWeight in 2614, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2614)
    0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 2614) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023552012 = score(doc=2614,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 2614, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2614)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    The aim of this study was to determine how parents select picture books for their children and which bibliographic data are important as they choose between different versions of the same title. Thirty-six parents of preschool children aged one to six years were interviewed and observed as they chose one version of the picture book Cinderella from among six bibliographic records and then selected from among six physical versions. Parents described the criteria and the reasons for their selections. The results indicate that the parents experienced difficulties using the library catalog and that the current bibliographic elements are inadequate.
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 53(2015) no.7, S.717-737
  13. Zumer, M.; O'Neill, E.T.: Modeling aggregates in FRBR (2012) 0.02 
    0.02310613 = product of:
  0.1078286 = sum of:
    0.02018744 = weight(_text_:classification in 1913) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02018744 = score(doc=1913,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 1913, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1913)
    0.06745373 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 1913) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06745373 = score(doc=1913,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.5770728 = fieldWeight in 1913, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1913)
    0.02018744 = weight(_text_:classification in 1913) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.02018744 = score(doc=1913,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 1913, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1913)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    In the bibliographic environment, the term aggregate is used to describe a bibliographic entity formed by combining distinct bibliographic units together. Aggregates are a large and growing class of information resources-up to twenty percent of the bibliographic records in OCLC's WorldCat may represent aggregates. The Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records: Final Report only briefly references aggregates. Difficulties and inconsistencies in the application of the FRBR model to aggregates have been identified as a significant impediment to FRBR implementation. To address the issue, the FRBR Review Group established a Working Group on Aggregates which completed its charge and submitted its final report in 2011. The Working Group proposed that an aggregate be defined as a "manifestation embodying multiple distinct expressions". This paper examines the proposed definition and explores how aggregates can be modeled.
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 50(2012) no.5/7, S.456-472
  14. Zumer, M.: ¬The new "Guidelines for national bibliographies in the digital age" (2007) 0.02 
    0.02075909 = product of:
  0.09687576 = sum of:
    0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 696) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023552012 = score(doc=696,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 696, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=696)
    0.04977173 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 696) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04977173 = score(doc=696,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.4258017 = fieldWeight in 696, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=696)
    0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 696) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023552012 = score(doc=696,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 696, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=696)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    The Working group on Guidelines for (electronic) national bibliographies was established in 2004 has started the work with an analysis of users and contexts of use of national bibliographies (NB) in the digital age. National bibliographies are changing dramatically: they include more and more also bibliographic records for digital resources and national bibliographic agencies are increasingly complementing (or even replacing) printed versions of NB with electronic. The guidelines will be soon posted for the world-wide review; this paper gives and overview of the document prepared so far.
    Content
    Vortrag anlässlich: WORLD LIBRARY AND INFORMATION CONGRESS: 73RD IFLA GENERAL CONFERENCE AND COUNCIL 19-23 August 2007, Durban, South Africa. - 89 - Bibliography with National Libraries and Classification and Indexing
  15. Zumer, M.: Implementation of FRBR : European research initiative (2004) 0.02 
    0.020154601 = product of:
  0.0940548 = sum of:
    0.026916584 = weight(_text_:classification in 5858) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026916584 = score(doc=5858,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.28149095 = fieldWeight in 5858, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5858)
    0.04022163 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 5858) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04022163 = score(doc=5858,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.34409973 = fieldWeight in 5858, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5858)
    0.026916584 = weight(_text_:classification in 5858) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.026916584 = score(doc=5858,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.28149095 = fieldWeight in 5858, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5858)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Series
    Cataloging and classification quarterly; 39, nos.3/4
    Source
    Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR): hype or cure-all. Ed. by P. le Boeuf,
  16. Doerr, M.; Riva, P.; Zumer, M.: FRBR entities : identity and identification (2012) 0.01 
    0.013232045 = product of:
  0.06174954 = sum of:
    0.013458292 = weight(_text_:classification in 1917) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013458292 = score(doc=1917,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.14074548 = fieldWeight in 1917, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1917)
    0.034832954 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 1917) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.034832954 = score(doc=1917,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.2979991 = fieldWeight in 1917, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1917)
    0.013458292 = weight(_text_:classification in 1917) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013458292 = score(doc=1917,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.14074548 = fieldWeight in 1917, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=1917)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    The models in the FRBR family include ways to document names or terms for all entities defined in the models, with identification as the ultimate aim, i.e., to distinguish entities by unique appellations and to use the most reliable appellations for entities in a given context. The intention in this paper is to explore the interrelationships between these different models with regards to their treatment of names, identifiers and other appellation entities. The specialisation/generalisation structure of the appellation-related entities and the relationships and properties of these entities will be discussed. The paper also tries to clarify the potential confusion of identity itself in this context - when are we talking about an entity via its name, about the name itself, about the name citation in a document and when about a name of name? In FRBR(er), titles for group 1, names for group 2 and terms for group 3 entities are merely defined as attributes of these entities. This serves the basic requirement of associating the appellation (label) with the entity, but does not allow introducing attributes of these appellations or relationships between and among them. FRAD, completed a decade later, defined as entities name, identifier, and controlled access point. Clearly making the distinction between a bibliographic entity and its name is a significant step taken in FRAD. This permits the separate treatment of relationships between the persons, families, and corporate bodies themselves and those relationships which instead operate between their names or between the controlled access points based on those names. In FRSAD, the most recent model, two entities are defined, Thema and Nomen. Again, the bibliographic entity is distinguished from the full range of its appellations. The FRBRoo model expanded on the treatment of appellations and identifiers in CRM by modeling the identifier assignment process. In FRBRoo, F12 Name was defined but identified with the existing CRM entity E41 Appellation. Current development is concentrating on integrating FRAD and FRSAD concepts into FRBRoo, and this is putting a focus on naming and appellations, causing new classes and properties to be defined, and requiring a re-evaluation of some of the decisions previously made in FRBRoo. As naming and appellations are such a significant feature of the FRBR family of conceptual models, this work is an important step in towards the consolidation of the models into a single coherent statement of the bibliographic universe.
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 50(2012) no.5/7, S.517-541
  17. Zeng, M.L.; Zumer, M.: Introducing FRSAD and mapping it with SKOS and other models (2009) 0.01 
    0.012980853 = product of:
  0.09086597 = sum of:
    0.062367413 = weight(_text_:subject in 3150) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.062367413 = score(doc=3150,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.5807668 = fieldWeight in 3150, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3150)
    0.02849856 = product of:
      0.05699712 = sum of:
        0.05699712 = weight(_text_:schemes in 3150) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05699712 = score(doc=3150,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.16067243 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.3512506 = idf(docFreq=569, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.35474116 = fieldWeight in 3150, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.3512506 = idf(docFreq=569, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3150)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    Abstract
    The Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Records (FRSAR) Working Group was formed in 2005 as the third IFLA working group of the FRBR family to address subject authority data issues and to investigate the direct and indirect uses of subject authority data by a wide range of users. This paper introduces the Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data (FRSAD), the model developed by the FRSAR Working Group, and discusses it in the context of other related conceptual models defined in the specifications during recent years, including the British Standard BS8723-5: Structured vocabularies for information retrieval - Guide Part 5: Exchange formats and protocols for interoperability, W3C's SKOS Simple Knowledge Organization System Reference, and OWL Web Ontology Language Reference. These models enable the consideration of the functions of subject authority data and concept schemes at a higher level that is independent of any implementation, system, or specific context, while allowing us to focus on the semantics, structures, and interoperability of subject authority data.
  18. Riesthuis, G.J.A.; Zumer, M.: ¬The Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records and knowledge organization (2003) 0.01 
    0.012951804 = product of:
  0.09066263 = sum of:
    0.029704956 = weight(_text_:subject in 2699) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.029704956 = score(doc=2699,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.27661324 = fieldWeight in 2699, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2699)
    0.060957674 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2699) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.060957674 = score(doc=2699,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.52149844 = fieldWeight in 2699, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2699)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    Abstract
    Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR, 1998), the study commissioned by IFLA, brings revolutionary changes in the way we see modern computer catalogues. The catalogue is not seen as a sequence of bibliographic records and a copy of a card catalogue, but as an interconnected network of related information. Implications of the new model for the future development of catalogues are discussed. Special attention is given to access points and relationships between entities and the changes those will bring into both the formal and subject cataloguing, and authority files.
  19. O'Neill, E.; Zumer, M.; Mixter, J.: FRBR aggregates : their types and frequency in library collections (2015) 0.01 
    0.011379677 = product of:
  0.07965773 = sum of:
    0.06745373 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2610) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.06745373 = score(doc=2610,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.5770728 = fieldWeight in 2610, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2610)
    0.0122040035 = product of:
      0.024408007 = sum of:
        0.024408007 = weight(_text_:22 in 2610) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024408007 = score(doc=2610,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03002521 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2610, 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=2610)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    Abstract
    Aggregates have been a frequent topic of discussion between library science researchers. This study seeks to better understand aggregates through the analysis of a sample of bibliographic records and review of the cataloging treatment of aggregates. The study focuses on determining how common aggregates are in library collections, what types of aggregates exist, how aggregates are described in bibliographic records, and the criteria for identifying aggregates from the information in bibliographic records. A sample of bibliographic records representing textual resources was taken from OCLC's WorldCat database. More than 20 percent of the sampled records represented aggregates and more works were embodied in aggregates than were embodied in single work manifestations. A variety of issues, including cataloging practices and the varying definitions of aggregates, made it difficult to accurately identify and quantify the presence of aggregates using only the information from bibliographic records.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  20. Bastos Vieira, S.; DeBrito, M.; Mustafa El Hadi, W.; Zumer, M.: Developing imaged KOS with the FRSAD Model : a conceptual methodology (2016) 0.01 
    0.010911817 = product of:
  0.050921813 = sum of:
    0.024005229 = weight(_text_:subject in 3109) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024005229 = score(doc=3109,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.22353725 = fieldWeight in 3109, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3109)
    0.013458292 = weight(_text_:classification in 3109) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013458292 = score(doc=3109,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.14074548 = fieldWeight in 3109, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3109)
    0.013458292 = weight(_text_:classification in 3109) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.013458292 = score(doc=3109,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03002521 = queryNorm
        0.14074548 = fieldWeight in 3109, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3109)
  0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    Abstract
    This proposal presents the methodology of indexing with images suggested by De Brito and Caribé (2015). The imagetic model is used as a compatible mechanism with FRSAD for a global information share and use of subject data, both within the library sector and beyond. The conceptual model of imagetic indexing shows how images are related to topics and 'key-images' are interpreted as nomens to implement the FRSAD model. Indexing with images consists of using images instead of key-words or descriptors, to represent and organize information. Implementing the imaged navigation in OPACs denotes multiple advantages derived from this rethinking the OPAC anew, since we are looking forward to sharing concepts within the subject authority data. Images, carrying linguistic objects, permeate inter-social and cultural concepts. In practice it includes translated metadata, symmetrical multilingual thesaurus, or any traditional indexing tools. iOPAC embodies efforts focused on conceptual levels as expected from librarians. Imaged interfaces are more intuitive since users do not need specific training for information retrieval, offering easier comprehension of indexing codes, larger conceptual portability of descriptors (as images), and a better interoperability between discourse codes and indexing competences affecting positively social and cultural interoperability. The imagetic methodology deploys R&D fields for more suitable interfaces taking into consideration users with specific needs such as deafness and illiteracy. This methodology arouse questions about the paradigms of the primacy of orality in information systems and pave the way to a legitimacy of multiple perspectives in document indexing by suggesting a more universal communication system based on images. Interdisciplinarity in neurosciences, linguistics and information sciences would be desirable competencies for further investigations about he nature of cognitive processes in information organization and classification while developing assistive KOS for individuals with communication problems, such autism and deafness.

Authors

Years

Types

  • a 38
  • el 9
  • r 2
  • m 1
  • More… Less…

Themes

Subjects

Classifications