-
Chambers, S.; Myall, C.: Cataloging and classification : review of the literature 2007-8 (2010)
0.10
0.09701299 = product of:
0.27163637 = sum of:
0.042009152 = weight(_text_:subject in 4309) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042009152 = score(doc=4309,freq=4.0), product of:
0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.3911902 = fieldWeight in 4309, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4309)
0.04079328 = weight(_text_:classification in 4309) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04079328 = score(doc=4309,freq=6.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.42661208 = fieldWeight in 4309, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4309)
0.04977173 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 4309) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04977173 = score(doc=4309,freq=4.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.4258017 = fieldWeight in 4309, 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=4309)
0.04079328 = weight(_text_:classification in 4309) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04079328 = score(doc=4309,freq=6.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.42661208 = fieldWeight in 4309, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4309)
0.09826894 = sum of:
0.069792934 = weight(_text_:texts in 4309) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.069792934 = score(doc=4309,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16460659 = queryWeight, product of:
5.4822793 = idf(docFreq=499, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.42399842 = fieldWeight in 4309, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.4822793 = idf(docFreq=499, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4309)
0.02847601 = weight(_text_:22 in 4309) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02847601 = score(doc=4309,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 4309, 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=4309)
0.35714287 = coord(5/14)
- Abstract
- This paper surveys library literature on cataloging and classification published in 2007-8, indicating its extent and range in terms of types of literature, major subject areas, and themes. The paper reviews pertinent literature in the following areas: the future of bibliographic control, general cataloging standards and texts, Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR), cataloging varied resources, metadata and cataloging in the Web world, classification and subject access, questions of diversity and diverse perspectives, additional reports of practice and research, catalogers' education and careers, keeping current through columns and blogs, and cataloging history.
- Date
- 10. 9.2000 17:38:22
-
Tillett, B.B.: Complementarity of perspectives for resource descriptions (2015)
0.05
0.048989277 = product of:
0.13716997 = sum of:
0.030006537 = weight(_text_:subject in 2288) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.030006537 = score(doc=2288,freq=4.0), product of:
0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.27942157 = fieldWeight in 2288, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2288)
0.029138058 = weight(_text_:classification in 2288) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.029138058 = score(doc=2288,freq=6.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.3047229 = fieldWeight in 2288, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2288)
0.0237488 = product of:
0.0474976 = sum of:
0.0474976 = weight(_text_:schemes in 2288) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0474976 = score(doc=2288,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16067243 = queryWeight, product of:
5.3512506 = idf(docFreq=569, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.2956176 = fieldWeight in 2288, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.3512506 = idf(docFreq=569, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2288)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.02513852 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2288) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02513852 = score(doc=2288,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.21506234 = fieldWeight in 2288, 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=2288)
0.029138058 = weight(_text_:classification in 2288) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.029138058 = score(doc=2288,freq=6.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.3047229 = fieldWeight in 2288, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2288)
0.35714287 = coord(5/14)
- Abstract
- Bibliographic data is used to describe resources held in the collections of libraries, archives and museums. That data is mostly available on the Web today and mostly as linked data. Also on the Web are the controlled vocabulary systems of name authority files, like the Virtual International Authority File (VIAF), classification systems, and subject terms. These systems offer their own linked data to potentially help users find the information they want - whether at their local library or anywhere in the world that is willing to make their resources available. We have found it beneficial to merge authority data for names on a global level, as the entities are relatively clear. That is not true for subject concepts and terminology that have categorisation systems developed according to varying principles and schemes and are in multiple languages. Rather than requiring everyone in the world to use the same categorisation/classification system in the same language, we know that the Web offers us the opportunity to add descriptors assigned around the world using multiple systems from multiple perspectives to identify our resources. Those descriptors add value to refine searches, help users worldwide and share globally what each library does locally.
- 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
-
Svenonius, E.: Bibliographic entities and their uses (2018)
0.04
0.03574913 = product of:
0.16682927 = sum of:
0.058276117 = weight(_text_:classification in 5187) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.058276117 = score(doc=5187,freq=6.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.6094458 = fieldWeight in 5187, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5187)
0.05027704 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 5187) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.05027704 = score(doc=5187,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.43012467 = fieldWeight in 5187, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5187)
0.058276117 = weight(_text_:classification in 5187) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.058276117 = score(doc=5187,freq=6.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.6094458 = fieldWeight in 5187, product of:
2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
6.0 = termFreq=6.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5187)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Abstract
- This article provides an interpretation of the structure of classification theory literature, from the late 19th Century to the present, by dividing it into four orders, and then describes the relationship between that and manuals for classification design.
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 56(2018) no.8, S.711-724
-
Parka, A.L.; Panchyshyn, R.S.: ¬The path to an RDA hybridized catalog : lessons from the Kent State University Libraries' RDA enrichment project (2016)
0.03
0.034942776 = product of:
0.12229971 = sum of:
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 2632) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=2632,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 2632, 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=2632)
0.060957674 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2632) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.060957674 = score(doc=2632,freq=6.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.52149844 = fieldWeight in 2632, 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=2632)
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 2632) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=2632,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 2632, 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=2632)
0.014238005 = product of:
0.02847601 = sum of:
0.02847601 = weight(_text_:22 in 2632) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.02847601 = score(doc=2632,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2632, 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=2632)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.2857143 = coord(4/14)
- Abstract
- This article describes in detail the library implementation of a Resource Description and Access (RDA) Enrichment project. The library "hybridized," or enriched legacy data from Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules bibliographic records by the addition of specific RDA elements. The project also cleaned up various other elements in the bibliographic data that were not directly RDA-related. There were over 28 million changes and edits made to these records, changes that would never have been made otherwise because the library lacked the resources to do them independently. The enrichment project made the bibliographic data consistent, and helped prepared the data for its eventual transition to a linked data environment.
- Date
- 21. 1.2016 19:08:22
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 54(2016) no.1, S.39-59
-
Diao, J.: "Fu hao," "fu hao," "fuHao," or "fu Hao"? : a cataloger's navigation of an ancient Chinese woman's name (2015)
0.03
0.03348412 = product of:
0.117194414 = sum of:
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 2009) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=2009,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 2009, 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=2009)
0.035193928 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2009) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035193928 = score(doc=2009,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.30108726 = fieldWeight in 2009, 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=2009)
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 2009) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=2009,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 2009, 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=2009)
0.034896467 = product of:
0.069792934 = sum of:
0.069792934 = weight(_text_:texts in 2009) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.069792934 = score(doc=2009,freq=2.0), product of:
0.16460659 = queryWeight, product of:
5.4822793 = idf(docFreq=499, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.42399842 = fieldWeight in 2009, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
5.4822793 = idf(docFreq=499, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2009)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.2857143 = coord(4/14)
- Abstract
- Chinese language catalogers' work is not only challenged by the revolution in cataloging standards and principles, but also by ancient Chinese names that emerged in archaeological discoveries and Chinese classic texts, which create a significant impact on bibliographic description and retrieval in terms of consistency and accuracy. This article takes an example of one ancient Chinese lady's name that is inconsistently romanized and described in OCLC to explore the reasons that cause the name variations and to propose an appropriate authorized access point after consulting both Western and Eastern scholarly practices. This article investigates the evolving history of pre-Qin Chinese names that are not addressed or exemplified in the Library of Congress Romanization Table, and recommends a revision of that Table.
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 53(2015) no.1, S.71-87
-
Putz, M.; Schaffner, V.; Seidler, W.: FRBR: The MAB2 Perspective (2012)
0.03
0.032000832 = product of:
0.11200291 = sum of:
0.029704956 = weight(_text_:subject in 1909) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.029704956 = score(doc=1909,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10738805 = queryWeight, product of:
3.576596 = idf(docFreq=3361, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.27661324 = fieldWeight in 1909, 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=1909)
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1909) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=1909,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1909, 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=1909)
0.035193928 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 1909) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.035193928 = score(doc=1909,freq=2.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.30108726 = fieldWeight in 1909, 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=1909)
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1909) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=1909,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1909, 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=1909)
0.2857143 = coord(4/14)
- Abstract
- FRBRizing legacy data has been a subject to research since the FRBR model was published in 1998. Studies were mainly conducted for MARC21, but in Austria MAB2, a data format based on the rules for descriptive cataloguing in academic libraries, mainly in Germany and Austria, is still in use. The implementation of Primo, an Ex Libris software, made research in FRBRizing MAB2 records necessary as Primo offers the possibility of building FRBR-groups by clustering different manifestations of a work. The first steps of FRBRizing bibliographic records in MAB2 at the Vienna University Library and the challenges in this context are highlighted in this paper.
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 50(2012) no.5/7, S.387-401
-
Martin, K.E.; Mundle, K.: Positioning libraries for a new bibliographic universe (2014)
0.03
0.03198977 = product of:
0.11196419 = sum of:
0.028549349 = weight(_text_:classification in 2608) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028549349 = score(doc=2608,freq=4.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.29856625 = fieldWeight in 2608, 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=2608)
0.042661484 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2608) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.042661484 = score(doc=2608,freq=4.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.3649729 = fieldWeight in 2608, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2608)
0.028549349 = weight(_text_:classification in 2608) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.028549349 = score(doc=2608,freq=4.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.29856625 = fieldWeight in 2608, 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=2608)
0.0122040035 = product of:
0.024408007 = sum of:
0.024408007 = weight(_text_:22 in 2608) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.024408007 = score(doc=2608,freq=2.0), product of:
0.10514317 = queryWeight, product of:
3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2608, 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=2608)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.2857143 = coord(4/14)
- Abstract
- This paper surveys the English-language literature on cataloging and classification published during 2011 and 2012, covering both theory and application. A major theme of the literature centered on Resource Description and Access (RDA), as the period covered in this review includes the conclusion of the RDA test, revisions to RDA, and the implementation decision. Explorations in the theory and practical applications of the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR), upon which RDA is organized, are also heavily represented. Library involvement with linked data through the creation of prototypes and vocabularies are explored further during the period. Other areas covered in the review include: classification, controlled vocabularies and name authority, evaluation and history of cataloging, special formats cataloging, cataloging and discovery services, non-AACR2/RDA metadata, cataloging workflows, and the education and careers of catalogers.
- Date
- 10. 9.2000 17:38:22
-
Bianchini, C.: Arrangement of FRBR entities in Colon Classification call numbers (2012)
0.03
0.031757887 = product of:
0.14820348 = sum of:
0.04037488 = weight(_text_:classification in 1914) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04037488 = score(doc=1914,freq=8.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.42223644 = fieldWeight in 1914, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1914)
0.06745373 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 1914) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.06745373 = score(doc=1914,freq=10.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.5770728 = fieldWeight in 1914, 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=1914)
0.04037488 = weight(_text_:classification in 1914) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.04037488 = score(doc=1914,freq=8.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.42223644 = fieldWeight in 1914, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1914)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Abstract
- This paper analyzes similarities and differences between FRBR entities and their representation in the Colon classification call numbers. Dealing with lack of organization in library shelves and in the lists of bibliographic records resulting from users' searches in our present online catalogues, the paper discusses the chance to organize bibliographic resources by FRBR entities using the model of the facet formula provided for call numbers in Colon Classification and by means of relevant, ready and useable extant data. Main results of this analysis are: correspondences between FRBR entities and categories expressed in Ranganathan's bibliographic system can be found; a sound but not completely FRBRized bibliographic arrangement can be reached by call numbers also in catalogues not structurally capable to satisfy FRBR model; in Ranganathan's classified catalogue semantic and semiotic cataloguing are perfectly integrated, giving access to bibliographic universe as a whole; facet formula for call numbers could be used as identifying device.
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 50(2012) no.5/7, S.473-493
-
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
-
Vukadin, A.: Bits and pieces of information : bibliographic modeling of transmedia (2014)
0.03
0.028773522 = product of:
0.13427643 = sum of:
0.026916584 = weight(_text_:classification in 1975) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.026916584 = score(doc=1975,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.28149095 = fieldWeight in 1975, 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=1975)
0.08044326 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 1975) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08044326 = score(doc=1975,freq=8.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.68819946 = fieldWeight in 1975, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1975)
0.026916584 = weight(_text_:classification in 1975) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.026916584 = score(doc=1975,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.28149095 = fieldWeight in 1975, 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=1975)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Abstract
- Transmedia is a technique of telling a single narrative or creating a continuous imaginary world across multiple media platforms. The article seeks to explore this emerging phenomenon in terms of bibliographic organization. It analyzes transmedia features in the context of bibliographic entities and relationships, particularly those outlined in the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records FRBR and FRBROO (object-oriented redefinition) conceptual models.
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 52(2014) no.3, S.285-302
-
Arsenault, C.; Noruzi, A.: Analysis of work-to-work bibliographic relationships through FRBR : a Canadian perspective (2012)
0.03
0.028566685 = product of:
0.1333112 = sum of:
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1923) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=1923,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1923, 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=1923)
0.08620717 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 1923) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08620717 = score(doc=1923,freq=12.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.73751014 = fieldWeight in 1923, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1923)
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1923) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=1923,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1923, 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=1923)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Abstract
- The purpose of this study is to investigate the characteristics of Canadian publications by analyzing their bibliographic relationships based on the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) model. The study indicates frequencies of occurrence of work-to-work bibliographic relationships for manifestations published in 2009 and catalogued in the AMICUS online catalogue. The results show that approximately 4.4 percent of the 2009 bibliographic records in the AMICUS catalogue exhibit a work-to-work bibliographic relationship.
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 50(2012) no.5/7, S.641-652
-
Howarth, L.C.: ISBD as bibliographic content standard : interweaving threads, contemplating a future ISBD as bibliographic content standard: interweaving threads, contemplating a future (2014)
0.03
0.028566685 = product of:
0.1333112 = sum of:
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1986) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=1986,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1986, 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=1986)
0.08620717 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 1986) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.08620717 = score(doc=1986,freq=12.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.73751014 = fieldWeight in 1986, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1986)
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1986) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=1986,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1986, 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=1986)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Abstract
- This summary considers the final articles selected for the special issue, interweaving some common threads that bind them together in their consideration of the International Standard Bibliographic Description (ISBD), consolidated edition, 2011, as a bibliographic content standard. With discussions of (1) the historical and current evolution of the ISBD, (2) the concept of Universal Bibliographic Control relative to an emerging Semantic Web environment, (3) ISBD and national cataloging codes, and (4) the continuing challenges of "non-book" resources, as context, the article concludes by exploring the question, "Is there a future for the ISBD?"
- Footnote
- Contribution in a special issue "ISBD: The Bibliographic Content Standard "
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 52(2014) no.8, S.982-999
-
Niu, J.: Hierarchical relationships in the bibliographic universe (2013)
0.03
0.026957152 = product of:
0.12580004 = sum of:
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1950) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=1950,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1950, 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=1950)
0.07869602 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 1950) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07869602 = score(doc=1950,freq=10.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.6732516 = fieldWeight in 1950, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1950)
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1950) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=1950,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1950, 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=1950)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Abstract
- The hierarchical relationships among bibliographic entities include whole-part structures and the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) hierarchical relationships among works, expression, manifestations, and items. The traditional MARC (Machine Readable Cataloging) format falls short in representing these hierarchical relationships. Based on detailed analyses of these hierarchical relationships and an examination of Metadata Encoding and Transmission Standard (METS) and Encoded Archival Description (EAD), which are well suited for hierarchical description, the author proposes some features of a new data structure standard named Resource Description Metadata Schema (RDMS). New cataloging practices based on RDMS will bring bibliographic description closer to archival description, and take one step further toward merged descriptive practices for bibliographic and archival materials.
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 51(2013) no.5, S.473-490
-
Willer, M.; Dunsire, G.: ISBD, the UNIMARC bibliographic format, and RDA : interoperability issues in namespaces and the linked data environment (2014)
0.03
0.026957152 = product of:
0.12580004 = sum of:
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1999) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=1999,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1999, 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=1999)
0.07869602 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 1999) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.07869602 = score(doc=1999,freq=10.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.6732516 = fieldWeight in 1999, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1999)
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1999) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=1999,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1999, 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=1999)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Abstract
- The article is an updated and expanded version of a paper presented to International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions in 2013. It describes recent work involving the representation of International Standard for Bibliographic Description (ISBD) and UNIMARC (UNIversal MARC) in Resource Description Framework (RDF), the basis of the Semantic Web and linked data. The UNIMARC Bibliographic format is used to illustrate issues arising from the development of a bibliographic element set and its semantic alignment with ISBD. The article discusses the use of such alignments in the automated processing of linked data for interoperability, using examples from ISBD, UNIMARC, and Resource Description and Access.
- Footnote
- Contribution in a special issue "ISBD: The Bibliographic Content Standard "
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 52(2014) no.8, S.888-913
-
Hider, P.; Liu, Y.-H.: ¬The use of RDA elements in support of FRBR user tasks (2013)
0.03
0.025176832 = product of:
0.117491886 = sum of:
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1958) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=1958,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1958, 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=1958)
0.070387855 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 1958) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.070387855 = score(doc=1958,freq=8.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.6021745 = fieldWeight in 1958, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1958)
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1958) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=1958,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1958, 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=1958)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Abstract
- Resource Description and Access (RDA) stipulates that certain "core" elements should always be included, where applicable, in bibliographic and authority records, due to their importance in supporting the user tasks defined in Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records. However, the elements' relative importance has not been empirically tested. This study investigates which elements in bibliographic records are currently most used in a university library catalog, by means of think-aloud sessions conducted by expert and non-expert users, who were assigned sets of typical bibliographic tasks. The results indicate that, in this context at least, the most utilized elements are not all core.
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 51(2013) no.8, S.857-872
-
Bianchini, C.; Willer, M.: ISBD resource and Its description in the context of the Semantic Web (2014)
0.03
0.025176832 = product of:
0.117491886 = sum of:
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1998) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=1998,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1998, 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=1998)
0.070387855 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 1998) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.070387855 = score(doc=1998,freq=8.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.6021745 = fieldWeight in 1998, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1998)
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1998) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=1998,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1998, 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=1998)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Abstract
- This article explores the question "What is an International Standard for Bibliographic Description (ISBD) resource in the context of the Semantic Web, and what is the relationship of its description to the linked data?" This question is discussed against the background of the dichotomy between the description and access using the Semantic Web differentiation of the three logical layers: real-world objects, web of data, and special purpose (bibliographic) data. The representation of bibliographic data as linked data is discussed, distinguishing the description of a resource from the iconic/objective and the informational/subjective viewpoints. In the conclusion, the authors give views on possible directions of future development of the ISBD.
- Footnote
- Contribution in a special issue "ISBD: The Bibliographic Content Standard "
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 52(2014) no.8, S.869-887
-
Salaba, A.; Mercun, T.; Aalberg, T.: Complexity of work families and entity-based visualization displays (2018)
0.03
0.025176832 = product of:
0.117491886 = sum of:
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 5184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=5184,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 5184, 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=5184)
0.070387855 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 5184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.070387855 = score(doc=5184,freq=8.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.6021745 = fieldWeight in 5184, product of:
2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
8.0 = termFreq=8.0
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5184)
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 5184) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=5184,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 5184, 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=5184)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Abstract
- Conceptual modeling of bibliographic data, including the FR models and the consolidated IFLA LRM, has provided an opportunity to shift focus to entities and relationships and to support hierarchical work-based exploration of bibliographic information. This paper reports on a study examining the complexity of a work's bibliographic family data and user interactions with data visualizations, compared to traditional displays. Findings suggest that the FRBR-based visual bibliographic information system supports work families of different complexities more equally than a traditional system. Differences between the two systems also show that the FRBR-based system was more effective especially for related-works and author-related tasks.
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 56(2018) no.7, S.628-652
-
Dousa, T.M.: E. Wyndham Hulme's classification of the attributes of books : on an early model of a core bibliographical entity (2017)
0.02
0.023764512 = product of:
0.11090105 = sum of:
0.03296595 = weight(_text_:classification in 4141) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03296595 = score(doc=4141,freq=12.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.3447546 = fieldWeight in 4141, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4141)
0.044969153 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 4141) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.044969153 = score(doc=4141,freq=10.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.3847152 = fieldWeight in 4141, product of:
3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
10.0 = termFreq=10.0
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4141)
0.03296595 = weight(_text_:classification in 4141) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.03296595 = score(doc=4141,freq=12.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.3447546 = fieldWeight in 4141, product of:
3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
12.0 = termFreq=12.0
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4141)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Abstract
- Modelling bibliographical entities is a prominent activity within knowledge organization today. Current models of bibliographic entities, such as Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) and the Bibliographic Framework (BIBFRAME), take inspiration from data-modelling methods developed by computer scientists from the mid-1970s on. Thus, it would seem that the modelling of bibliographic entities is an activity of very recent vintage. However, it is possible to find examples of bibliographical models from earlier periods of knowledge organization. The purpose of this paper is to draw attention to one such model, outlined by the early twentiethcentury British classification theorist E. Wyndham Hulme in his essay on "Principles of Book Classification" (1911-1912). There, Hulme set forth a classification of various attributes by which books can be classified. These he first divided into "accidental" and "inseparable" attributes. Accidental attributes were subdivided into edition-level and copy-level attributes and inseparable attitudes, into "physical" and "non-physical" attributes. Comparison of Hulme's classification of attributes with those of FRBR and BIBFRAME 2.0 reveals that the different classes of attributes in Hulme's classification correspond to groups of attributes associated with different bibliographical entities in those models. These later models assume the existence of different bibliographic entities in an abstract hierarchy among which attributes are distributed, whereas Hulme posited only a single entity-the book-whose various aspects he clustered into different classes of attributes. Thus, Hulme's model offers an interesting alternative to current assumptions about how to conceptualize the relationship between attributes and entities in the bibliographical universe.
-
Gu, B.: ISBD in China : the road to internationalization (2014)
0.02
0.023724673 = product of:
0.11071514 = sum of:
0.026916584 = weight(_text_:classification in 2000) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.026916584 = score(doc=2000,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.28149095 = fieldWeight in 2000, 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=2000)
0.056881975 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 2000) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.056881975 = score(doc=2000,freq=4.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.4866305 = fieldWeight in 2000, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2000)
0.026916584 = weight(_text_:classification in 2000) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.026916584 = score(doc=2000,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.28149095 = fieldWeight in 2000, 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=2000)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Abstract
- The article discusses the historical background, present status, and future perspectives of International Standard for Bibliographic Description (ISBD) translations, research, and applications in China. It also analyzes the relationship between ISBD and Chinese Library Cataloging Rules and the internationalization process of Chinese library cataloging practices.
- Footnote
- Contribution in a special issue "ISBD: The Bibliographic Content Standard "
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 52(2014) no.8, S.914-924
-
Morse, T.: Mapping relationships : examining bibliographic relationships in sheet maps from Tillett to RDA (2012)
0.02
0.023156079 = product of:
0.1080617 = sum of:
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1896) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=1896,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1896, 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=1896)
0.060957674 = weight(_text_:bibliographic in 1896) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.060957674 = score(doc=1896,freq=6.0), product of:
0.11688946 = queryWeight, product of:
3.893044 = idf(docFreq=2449, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.52149844 = fieldWeight in 1896, 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=1896)
0.023552012 = weight(_text_:classification in 1896) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.023552012 = score(doc=1896,freq=2.0), product of:
0.09562149 = queryWeight, product of:
3.1847067 = idf(docFreq=4974, maxDocs=44218)
0.03002521 = queryNorm
0.24630459 = fieldWeight in 1896, 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=1896)
0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
- Abstract
- This study presents a qualitative examination of the applicability of several taxonomies of bibliographic relationships to sheet maps. Examples of relationships between sheet maps are identified and typed using the systems developed by Tillett and Smiraglia and the taxonomy of relationships described in the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) conceptual model and in Resource Description and Access (RDA). This process reveals that while many of the relationship categories in these systems apply well to sheet maps, some are not applicable at all while others may apply with some redefinition.
- Source
- Cataloging and classification quarterly. 50(2012) no.4, S.225-248
