-
Clarke, R.I.: Breaking records : the history of bibliographic records and their influence in conceptualizing bibliographic data (2015)
0.03
0.031424463 = product of:
0.14664748 = sum of:
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1877) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=1877,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1877, 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=1877)
0.09954346 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 1877) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.09954346 = score(doc=1877,freq=16.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.8516034 = fieldWeight in 1877, product of:
4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
16.0 = termFreq=16.0
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1877)
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1877) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=1877,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1877, 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=1877)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Abstract
- A bibliographic record is a conceptual whole that includes all bibliographic information about a resource together in one place. With the Semantic Web, individual data statements are linked across the web. This position article argues that the traditional conceptualization of bibliographic records affects the affordances and limitations of that data. A historical analysis of the development of bibliographic records contrasted with the Semantic Web model reveals how the "record" model shaped library cataloging and the implications on library catalogs today. Reification of the record model for bibliographic data hampers possibilities for innovation in cataloging, inspiring a reconceptualization of bibliographic description.
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 53(2015) no.3/4, S.286-302
-
Seikel, M.: General notes in catalog records versus FRBR user tasks (2013)
0.02
0.02075909 = product of:
0.09687576 = sum of:
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1929) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=1929,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1929, 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=1929)
0.04977173 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 1929) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04977173 = score(doc=1929,freq=4.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.4258017 = fieldWeight in 1929, 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=1929)
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1929) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=1929,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1929, 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=1929)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Abstract
- This article analyzes the literature concerning uses of notes in bibliographic records and also certain grammatical conventions used by catalogers to communicate information about the resources they are describing. It shows that these types of data do not aid the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) user tasks in the resource discovery process. It also describes how general notes are addressed in Resource Description Access (RDA), and advocates that cataloging practices involving most general notes and such conventions as bracketing and abbreviations should be discontinued with the widespread use of RDA.
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 51(2013) no.4, S.420-427
-
Panchyshyn, R.S.; Park, A.L.: Resource Description and Access (RDA) database enrichment : the path to a hybridized catalog (2015)
0.02
0.02075909 = product of:
0.09687576 = sum of:
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 2017) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=2017,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 2017, 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=2017)
0.04977173 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2017) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04977173 = score(doc=2017,freq=4.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.4258017 = fieldWeight in 2017, 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=2017)
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 2017) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=2017,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 2017, 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=2017)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Abstract
- This article examines the benefits of a Resource Description and Access (RDA) enrichment project for libraries. Enrichment projects "hybridize", or enrich legacy Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules, Second Edition (AACR2) bibliographic records with RDA data. Until a replacement for MARC is developed, bibliographic data will continue to be encoded in MARC 21 in many integrated library systems. Library catalogs contain records coded under both AACR2 and RDA standards. RDA enrichment projects benefit the patron experience because the data is cleaner and more consistent for patron use and display, cataloging staff workflows are simplified, and the consistency of the data is advantageous for system development and data exchange with other communities
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 53(2015) no.2, S.214-233
-
Bianchini, C.; Guerrini, M.: ¬A turning point for catalogs : Ranganathan's possible point of view (2015)
0.02
0.019848065 = product of:
0.09262431 = sum of:
0.02018744 = weight(_text_:classification in 2006) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02018744 = score(doc=2006,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 2006, 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=2006)
0.05224943 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2006) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05224943 = score(doc=2006,freq=6.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.44699866 = fieldWeight in 2006, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2006)
0.02018744 = weight(_text_:classification in 2006) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02018744 = score(doc=2006,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 2006, 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=2006)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Abstract
- Since the end of the last century, catalogs have been changing more and more quickly. This change is following a recognizable course, beginning with the publication of Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records, passing through the reorganization of international cataloging principles, the revision of international standards of the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (International Standard for Bibliographic Description), and the foundation of new cataloging codes, such as Resource Description and Access. While principles, models, and rules are well established, bibliographic formats seem to be a bottleneck and users seem far from libraries. This article aims to present an overview of current changes, potential convergences, developments, and weak points from Ranganathan's point of view.
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 53(2015) no.3/4, S.341-351
-
Weinheimer, J.: ¬A visual explanation of the areas defined by AACR2, RDA, ISBD, LC NAF, LC Classification, LC Subject Headings, Dewey Classification, MARC21 : plus a quick look at ISO2709, MARCXML and a version of BIBFRAME (2015)
0.02
0.017691448 = product of:
0.08256009 = sum of:
0.02546139 = weight(_text_:subject in 2882) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02546139 = score(doc=2882,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.23709705 = fieldWeight in 2882, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2882)
0.028549349 = weight(_text_:classification in 2882) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028549349 = score(doc=2882,freq=4.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.29856625 = fieldWeight in 2882, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2882)
0.028549349 = weight(_text_:classification in 2882) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028549349 = score(doc=2882,freq=4.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.29856625 = fieldWeight in 2882, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2882)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
-
Petrucciani, A.: Quality of library catalogs and value of (good) catalogs (2015)
0.02
0.017635275 = product of:
0.08229795 = sum of:
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1878) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=1878,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1878, 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=1878)
0.035193928 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 1878) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035193928 = score(doc=1878,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.30108726 = fieldWeight in 1878, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1878)
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1878) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=1878,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1878, 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=1878)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Abstract
- The quality of large catalogs is uneven and often low, but this issue is underrated and understudied. Library catalogs often fail to communicate correct and clear information to users and their low quality is not simply due to faults, duplications, and so on but also to unwise cataloging standards and policies. While there is plenty of uncontrolled information about books and other publications, the need for good-quality bibliographic information is apparent and library catalogs may provide a trustworthy map of the publishing output, with full control of editions, works, authors, and so on and effective navigation functions, which are lacking in today's information-rich environment.
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 53(2015) no.3/4, S.303-313
-
Wynne, S.C.; Hanscom, M.J.: ¬The effect of next-generation catalogs on catalogers and cataloging functions in academic libraries (2011)
0.02
0.017635275 = product of:
0.08229795 = sum of:
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1889) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=1889,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1889, 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=1889)
0.035193928 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 1889) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035193928 = score(doc=1889,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.30108726 = fieldWeight in 1889, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1889)
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1889) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=1889,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1889, 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=1889)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Abstract
- Next-generation catalogs or discovery tools (NGCs) overlay existing bibliographic data and repackage it in displays that differ from the traditional catalog. Many implementations of NGCs have revealed errors, omissions, or inconsistencies in the underlying data that had not been apparent in the traditional catalog. This study explored the effect of NGCs on cataloging functions and catalogers in academic libraries, examining catalogers' participation in the selection and implementation processes, identifying and correcting data problems, changes to procedures or workflow, and staffing.
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 49(2011) no.3, S.179-207
-
Häusner, E.-M.; Sommerland, Y.: Assessment of metadata quality of the Swedish National Bibliography through mapping user awareness (2018)
0.02
0.017635275 = product of:
0.08229795 = sum of:
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 5169) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=5169,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 5169, 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=5169)
0.035193928 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 5169) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035193928 = score(doc=5169,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.30108726 = fieldWeight in 5169, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5169)
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 5169) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=5169,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 5169, 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=5169)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Abstract
- This article is examining if the metadata quality of the Swedish National Bibliography could be measured through mapping the level of user awareness regarding the characteristics of the data. A qualitative meta-synthesis was carried out and results from two previous studies conducted at the National Library of Sweden were interpreted and conceptualized through an integrated analyze. The results of the meta-synthesis showed a need for an action plan for increasing user awareness to efficiently reach target groups of national bibliographic data at its fullest potential, i.e. user awareness on the usability and the quality of the metadata.
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 56(2018) no.1, S.96-109
-
Theimer, S.: ¬A cataloger's resolution to become more creative : how and why (2012)
0.01
0.01314472 = product of:
0.061342027 = sum of:
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1934) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=1934,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1934, 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=1934)
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1934) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=1934,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1934, 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=1934)
0.014238005 = product of:
0.02847601 = sum of:
0.02847601 = weight(_text_:22 in 1934) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02847601 = score(doc=1934,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = 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)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Date
- 29. 5.2015 11:08:22
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 50(2012) no.8, S.894-902
-
Lee, W.-C.: Conflicts of semantic warrants in cataloging practices (2017)
0.01
0.011756477 = product of:
0.054863557 = sum of:
0.021217827 = weight(_text_:subject in 3871) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.021217827 = score(doc=3871,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.19758089 = fieldWeight in 3871, 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=3871)
0.016822865 = weight(_text_:classification in 3871) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016822865 = score(doc=3871,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.17593184 = fieldWeight in 3871, 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=3871)
0.016822865 = weight(_text_:classification in 3871) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.016822865 = score(doc=3871,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.17593184 = fieldWeight in 3871, 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=3871)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Abstract
- This study presents preliminary themes surfaced from an ongoing ethnographic study. The research question is: how and where do cultures influence the cataloging practices of using U.S. standards to catalog Chinese materials? The author applies warrant as a lens for evaluating knowledge representation systems, and extends the application from examining classificatory decisions to cataloging decisions. Semantic warrant as a conceptual tool allows us to recognize and name the various rationales behind cataloging decisions, grants us explanatory power, and the language to "visualize" and reflect on the conflicting priorities in cataloging practices. Through participatory observation, the author recorded the cataloging practices of two Chinese catalogers working on the same cataloging project. One of the catalogers is U.S. trained, and another cataloger is a professor of Library and Information Science from China, who is also a subject expert and a cataloger of Chinese special collections. The study shows how the catalogers describe Chinese special collections using many U.S. cataloging and classification standards but from different approaches. The author presents particular cases derived from the fieldwork, with an emphasis on the many layers presented by cultures, principles, standards, and practices of different scope, each of which may represent conflicting warrants. From this, it is made clear that the conflicts of warrants influence cataloging practice. We may view the conflicting warrants as an interpretation of the tension between different semantic warrants and the globalization and localization of cataloging standards.
-
Clarke, R.I.: Cataloging research by design : a taxonomic approach to understanding research questions in cataloging (2018)
0.01
0.011266903 = product of:
0.05257888 = sum of:
0.02018744 = weight(_text_:classification in 5188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02018744 = score(doc=5188,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 5188, 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=5188)
0.02018744 = weight(_text_:classification in 5188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02018744 = score(doc=5188,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.21111822 = fieldWeight in 5188, 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=5188)
0.0122040035 = product of:
0.024408007 = sum of:
0.024408007 = weight(_text_:22 in 5188) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024408007 = score(doc=5188,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 5188, 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=5188)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Date
- 30. 5.2019 19:14:22
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 56(2018) no.8, S.683-701
-
Joseph, K.: Wikipedia knows the value of what the library catalog forgets (2019)
0.01
0.009516451 = product of:
0.06661515 = sum of:
0.033307575 = weight(_text_:classification in 5277) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.033307575 = score(doc=5277,freq=4.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.34832728 = fieldWeight in 5277, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5277)
0.033307575 = weight(_text_:classification in 5277) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.033307575 = score(doc=5277,freq=4.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.34832728 = fieldWeight in 5277, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5277)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Abstract
- Shifting library catalogs from physical to digital has come at a cost. Catalog records no longer leave traces of their own evolution, which is a loss for librarianship. The subjective nature of information classification warrants self-examination, within which we may see the evolution of practice, debates over attribution and relevance, and how culture is reflected in the systems used to describe it. Wikipedia models what is possible: revision histories and discussion pages function as knowledge generators. A list of unanswerable questions for the modern catalog urges us to construct a new, forward-thinking bibliography that allows us to look backward.
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 57(2019) no.2/3, S.166-183
-
Howarth, L.C.: "Is there a catalog in your future?" : Celebrating Nancy J. Williamson: Scholar, educator, colleague, mentor (2010)
0.01
0.007690453 = product of:
0.053833168 = sum of:
0.026916584 = weight(_text_:classification in 3565) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.026916584 = score(doc=3565,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.28149095 = fieldWeight in 3565, 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=3565)
0.026916584 = weight(_text_:classification in 3565) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.026916584 = score(doc=3565,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.28149095 = fieldWeight in 3565, 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=3565)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 48(2010) no.1, S.1-9
-
Cerbo II, M.A.: Is there a future for library catalogers? (2011)
0.01
0.007690453 = product of:
0.053833168 = sum of:
0.026916584 = weight(_text_:classification in 1892) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.026916584 = score(doc=1892,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.28149095 = fieldWeight in 1892, 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=1892)
0.026916584 = weight(_text_:classification in 1892) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.026916584 = score(doc=1892,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.28149095 = fieldWeight in 1892, 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=1892)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 49(2011) no.4, S.323-327
-
Bergman, O.; Gradovitch, N.; Bar-Ilan, J.; Beyth-Marom, R.: Folder versus tag preference in personal information management (2013)
0.01
0.0067974646 = product of:
0.04758225 = sum of:
0.023791125 = weight(_text_:classification in 1103) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023791125 = score(doc=1103,freq=4.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24880521 = fieldWeight in 1103, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1103)
0.023791125 = weight(_text_:classification in 1103) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023791125 = score(doc=1103,freq=4.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24880521 = fieldWeight in 1103, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1103)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Abstract
- Users' preferences for folders versus tags was studied in 2 working environments where both options were available to them. In the Gmail study, we informed 75 participants about both folder-labeling and tag-labeling, observed their storage behavior after 1 month, and asked them to estimate the proportions of different retrieval options in their behavior. In the Windows 7 study, we informed 23 participants about tags and asked them to tag all their files for 2 weeks, followed by a period of 5 weeks of free choice between the 2 methods. Their storage and retrieval habits were tested prior to the learning session and, after 7 weeks, using special classification recording software and a retrieval-habits questionnaire. A controlled retrieval task and an in-depth interview were conducted. Results of both studies show a strong preference for folders over tags for both storage and retrieval. In the minority of cases where tags were used for storage, participants typically used a single tag per information item. Moreover, when multiple classification was used for storage, it was only marginally used for retrieval. The controlled retrieval task showed lower success rates and slower retrieval speeds for tag use. Possible reasons for participants' preferences are discussed.
-
Altenhöner, R.; Frodl, C.; Gömpel, R.; Jahns, Y.; Junger, U.; Mahnke, C.; Meyer, A.; Pfeifer, B.; Oehlschläger, S.; Svensson, L.G.: Libraries beyond libraries : Integration, Innovation and Information for all Aus den Veranstaltungen der Sektionen Bibliografie, Katalogisierung, Klassifikation und Indexierung, Knowledge Management und Informationstechnologie sowie der Core Activity ICADS der IFLA Division III (Library Services) beim Weltkongress Bibliothek und Information, 77. IFLA-Generalkonferenz in San Juan, Puerto Rico (2011)
0.01
0.0067291465 = product of:
0.047104023 = sum of:
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 174) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=174,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 174, 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=174)
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 174) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=174,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 174, 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=174)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Abstract
- Darin u.a. Bericht über 'Cataloguing Section' (S.871), 'ISBD Review Group' (S.872-873), 'FRBR Review Group' (S.873-874), 'Virtual International authoriy File (VIAF)' (S.875-876), 'Satellite conference on RDA' (S.876-879), 'Classification and Indexing Section' (S.879-882).
-
Polidoro, P.: Using qualitative methods to analyze online catalog interfaces (2015)
0.01
0.0067291465 = product of:
0.047104023 = sum of:
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1879) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=1879,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1879, 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=1879)
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1879) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=1879,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1879, 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=1879)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 53(2015) no.3/4, S.314-330
-
Yaroshenko, T.; Bankovska, I.: Libraries and catalogs in Ukraine : the way to understand the past and build the future (2015)
0.01
0.0067291465 = product of:
0.047104023 = sum of:
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1880) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=1880,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1880, 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=1880)
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1880) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=1880,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1880, 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=1880)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 53(2015) no.3/4, S.430-452
-
Borie, J.; MacDonald, K.; Sze, E.: Asserting catalogers' place in the "Value of Libraries" conversation (2015)
0.01
0.0067291465 = product of:
0.047104023 = sum of:
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1882) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=1882,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1882, 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=1882)
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1882) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=1882,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1882, 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=1882)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 53(2015) no.3/4, S.352-367
-
Maurer, M.B.; McCutcheon, S.; Schwing, T.: Who's doing what? : findability and author-supplied ETD metadata in the library catalog (2011)
0.01
0.0067291465 = product of:
0.047104023 = sum of:
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1891) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=1891,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1891, 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=1891)
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1891) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=1891,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1891, 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=1891)
0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 49(2011) no.4, S.277-310
