Search (44 results, page 1 of 3)

0.02258471 = product of:
  0.06775413 = sum of:
    0.019081537 = weight(_text_:of in 3611) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019081537 = score(doc=3611,freq=26.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.31146988 = fieldWeight in 3611, product of:
          5.0990195 = tf(freq=26.0), with freq of:
            26.0 = termFreq=26.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3611)
    0.03540283 = weight(_text_:systems in 3611) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03540283 = score(doc=3611,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.29405114 = fieldWeight in 3611, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3611)
    0.013269759 = product of:
      0.026539518 = sum of:
        0.026539518 = weight(_text_:22 in 3611) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026539518 = score(doc=3611,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13719016 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3611, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3611)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(3/9)

Abstract

Purpose - This paper aims to discuss some long-standing issues of the development of a subject heading language as pre- or postcoordinated. Design/methodology/approach - In a review of literature on pre- and postcoordination and user behaviour, 20 criteria originally discussed by Svenonius are considered. Findings - The advantages and disadvantages of pre- and postcoordinated systems are on a very similar level. Most subject heading languages developed recently are precoordinated. They all require investments in highly skilled intellectual work, and are therefore expensive and difficult to maintain. Postcoordinated systems seem to have more advantages for information providers, but less for users. However, most of these disadvantages could be overcome by known information retrieval models and techniques. Research limitations/implications - The criteria originally discussed by Svenonius are difficult to evaluate in an exact manner. Some of them are also irrelevant because of changes in information retrieval systems. Practical implications - It was found that the decision on whether to use a pre- or postcoordinated system cannot be taken independent of consideration of the subject authority file and the functions of an information retrieval system, which should support users on one hand and information providers and indexers on the other. Originality/value - This literature review brings together some findings that have not been considered together previously.

Content

Bezug zu: Svenonius, E.: Precoordination or not?. In: Subject indexing: principles and practices in the 90's. Proceedings of the IFLA Satellite Meeting Held in Lisbon, Portugal, 17-18 August 1993, and sponsored by the IFLA Section on Classification and Indexing and the Instituto da Biblioteca Nacional e do Livro, Lisbon, Portugal. Ed.: R.P. Holley et al. München: Saur 1995. S.231-255.

Date

20. 6.2010 14:22:43

Source

Journal of documentation. 65(2009) no.5, S.817-833

0.021780707 = product of:
  0.06534212 = sum of:
    0.018148692 = weight(_text_:of in 3600) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.018148692 = score(doc=3600,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.29624295 = fieldWeight in 3600, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3600)
    0.028615767 = weight(_text_:systems in 3600) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028615767 = score(doc=3600,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.23767869 = fieldWeight in 3600, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3600)
    0.018577661 = product of:
      0.037155323 = sum of:
        0.037155323 = weight(_text_:22 in 3600) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.037155323 = score(doc=3600,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13719016 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3600, 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=3600)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.33333334 = coord(3/9)

Abstract

Evaluative and comparative studies of catalog data have tended to focus on methods that are labor intensive, demand expertise, and can examine only a limited number of records. This study explores an alternative approach to gathering and analyzing catalog data, focusing on the currency and consistency of controlled headings. The resulting data provide insight into libraries' use of changed headings and their success in maintaining currency and consistency, and the systems needed to support the current pace of heading changes.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.01752681 = product of:
  0.052580424 = sum of:
    0.016778905 = weight(_text_:applications in 664) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016778905 = score(doc=664,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.17247584 = queryWeight, product of:
          4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.09728264 = fieldWeight in 664, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          4.4025097 = idf(docFreq=1471, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=664)
    0.016533567 = weight(_text_:of in 664) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016533567 = score(doc=664,freq=122.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.2698791 = fieldWeight in 664, product of:
          11.045361 = tf(freq=122.0), with freq of:
            122.0 = termFreq=122.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=664)
    0.019267956 = weight(_text_:software in 664) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019267956 = score(doc=664,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.15541996 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.123973496 = fieldWeight in 664, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
          0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=664)
  0.33333334 = coord(3/9)

Footnote

Rez. in: Knowledge organization 34(2007) no.1, S.58-60 (P. Buizza): "This Nuovo soggettario is the first sign of subject indexing renewal in Italy. Italian subject indexing has been based until now on Soggettario per i cataloghi delle biblioteche italiane (Firenze, 1956), a list of preferred terms and see references, with suitable hierarchical subdivisions and cross references, derived from the subject catalogue of the National Library in Florence (BNCF). New headings later used in Bibliografia nazionale italiana (BNI) were added without references, nor indeed with any real maintenance. Systematic instructions on how to combine the terms are lacking: the indexer using this instrument is obliged to infer the order of terms absent from the lists by consulting analogous entries. Italian libraries are suffering from the limits of this subject catalogue: vocabulary is inadequate, obsolete and inconsistent, the syndetic structure incomplete and inaccurate, and the syntax ill-defined, poorly explained and unable to reflect complex subjects. In the nineties, the Subject Indexing Research Group (Gruppo di ricerca sull'indicizzazione per soggetto, GRIS) of the AIB (Italian Library Association) developed the indexing theory and some principles of PRECIS and drew up guidelines based on consistent principles for vocabulary, semantic relationships and subject string construction, the latter according to role syntax (Guida 1997). In overhauling the Soggettario, the National Library in Florence aimed at a comprehensive indexing system. (A report on the method and evolution of the work has been published in Knowledge Organization (Lucarelli 2005), while the feasibility study is available in Italian (Per un nuovo Soggettario 2002). Any usable terms from the old Soggettario will be transferred to the new system, while taking into consideration international norms and interlinguistic compatibility, as well as applications outside the immediate library context. The terms will be accessible via a suitable OPAC operating on the most advanced software.
The guide Nuovo soggettario was presented on February 8' 2007 at a one-day seminar in the Palazzo Vecchio, Florence, in front of some 500 spellbound people. The Nuovo soggettario comes in two parts: the guide in book-form and an accompanying CD-ROM, by way of which a prototype of the thesaurus may be accessed on the Internet. In the former, rules are stated; the latter contains a pdf version of the guide and the first installment of the controlled vocabulary, which is to be further enriched and refined. Syntactic instructions (general application guidelines, as well as special annotations of particular terms) and the compiled subject strings file have yet to be added. The essentials of the new system are: 1) an analytic-synthetic approach, 2) use of terms (units of controlled vocabulary) and subject strings (which represent subjects by combining terms in linear order to form syntactic relationships), instead of main headings and subdivisions, 3) specificity of terms and strings, with a view to the co-extension of subject string and subject matter and 4) a clear distinction between semantic and syntactic relationships, with full control of them both. Basic features of the vocabulary include the uniformity and univocality of terms and thesaural management of a priori (semantic) relationships. Starting from its definition, each term can be categorially analyzed: four macro-categories are represented (agents, action, things, time), for which there are subcategories called facets (e.g., for actions: activities, disciplines, processes), which in turn have sub-facets. Morphological instructions conform to national and international standards, including BS 8723, ANSI/ NISO Z39.19 and the IFLA draft of Guidelines for multilingual thesauri, even for syntactic factorization. Different kinds of semantic relationships are represented thoroughly, and particular attention is paid to poly-hierarchies, which are used only in moderation: both top terms must actually be relevant. Node labels are used to specify the principle of division applied. Instance relationships are also used.
An entry is structured so as to present all the essential elements of the indexing system. For each term are given: category, facet, related terms, Dewey interdisciplinary class number and, if necessary; definition or scope notes. Sources used are referenced (an appendix in the book lists those used in the current work). Historical notes indicate whenever a change of term has occurred, thus smoothing the transition from the old lists. In chapter 5, the longest one, detailed instructions with practical examples show how to create entries and how to relate terms; upper relationships must always be complete, right up to the top term, whereas hierarchies of related terms not yet fully developed may remain unfinished. Subject string construction consists in a double operation: analysis and synthesis. The former is the analysis of logical functions performed by single concepts in the definition of the subject (e.g., transitive actions, object, agent, etc.) or in syntactic relationships (transitive relationships and belonging relationship), so that each term for those concepts is assigned its role (e.g., key concept, transitive element, agent, instrument, etc.) in the subject string, where the core is distinct from the complementary roles (e.g., place, time, form, etc.). Synthesis is based on a scheme of nuclear and complementary roles, and citation order follows agreed-upon principles of one-to-one relationships and logical dependence. There is no standard citation order based on facets, in a categorial logic, but a flexible one, although thorough. For example, it is possible for a time term (subdivision) to precede an action term, when the former is related to the latter as the object of action: "Arazzi - Sec. 16.-17. - Restauro" [Tapestry - 16th-17th century - Restoration] (p. 126). So, even with more complex subjects, it is possible to produce perfectly readable strings covering the whole of the subject matter without splitting it into two incomplete and complementary headings. To this end, some unusual connectives are adopted, giving the strings a more discursive style.
Thesaurus software is based on AgroVoc (http:// www.fao.org/aims/ag_intro.htm) provided by the FAO, but in modified form. Many searching options and contextualization within the full hierarchies are possible, so that the choice of morphology and syntax of terms and strings is made easier by the complete overview of semantic relationships. New controlled terms will be available soon, thanks to the work in progress - there are now 13,000 terms, of which 40 percent are non-preferred. In three months, free Internet access by CD-ROM will cease and a subscription will be needed. The digital version of old Soggettario and the corresponding unstructured lists of headings adopted in 1956-1985 are accessible together with the thesaurus, so that the whole vocabulary, old and new, will be at the fingertips of the indexer, who is forced to work with both tools during this transition period. In the future, it will be possible to integrate the thesaurus into library OPACs. The two parts form a very consistent and detailed resource. The guide is filled with examples; the accurate, clearly-expressed and consistent instructions are further enhanced by good use of fonts and type size, facilitating reading. The thesaurus is simple and quick to use, very rich, albeit only a prototype; see, for instance, a list of DDC numbers and related terms with their category and facet, and then entries, hierarchies and so on, and the capacity of the structure to show organized knowledge. The excellent outcome of a demanding experimentation, the intended guide welcomes in a new era of subject indexing in Italy and is highly recommended. The new method has been designed to be easily teachable to new and experimented indexers.
Now BNI is beginning to use the new language, pointing the way for the adoption of Nuovo soggettario in Italian libraries: a difficult challenge whose success is not assured. To name only one issue: including all fields of study requires particular care in treating terms with different specialized meanings; cooperation of other libraries and institutions is foreseen. At the same time, efforts are being made to assure the system's interoperability outside the library world. It is clear that a great commitment is required. "Too complex a system!" say the naysayers. "Only at the beginning," the proponents reply. The new system goes against the mainstream, compared with the imitation of the easy way offered by search engines - but we know that they must enrich their devices to improve quality, just repeating the work on semantic and syntactic relationships that leads formal expressions to the meanings they are intended to communicate - and also compared with research to create automated devices supporting human work, for the need to simplify cataloguing. Here AI is not involved, but automation is widely used to facilitate and to support the conscious work of indexers guided by rules as clear as possible. The advantage of Nuovo soggettario is its combination of a thesaurus (a much-appreciated tool used across the world) with the equally widespread technique of subject-string construction, which is to say: the rational and predictable combination of the terms used. The appearance of this original, unparalleled working model may well be a great occasion in the international development of indexing, as, on one hand, the Nuovo soggettario uses a recognized tool (the thesaurus) and, on the other, by permitting both pre-coordination and post-coordination, it attempts to overcome the fragmentation of increasingly complex and specialized subjects into isolated, single-term descriptors. This is a serious proposition that merits consideration from both theoretical and practical points of view - and outside Italy, too."

0.011770782 = product of:
  0.052968517 = sum of:
    0.019249594 = weight(_text_:of in 5042) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019249594 = score(doc=5042,freq=54.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.3142131 = fieldWeight in 5042, product of:
          7.3484693 = tf(freq=54.0), with freq of:
            54.0 = termFreq=54.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=5042)
    0.033718925 = weight(_text_:software in 5042) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.033718925 = score(doc=5042,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.15541996 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.21695362 = fieldWeight in 5042, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.9671519 = idf(docFreq=2274, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=5042)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

Work on a prototype of the new Soggettario (the main Italian subject heading list) has begun in October 2004 at the Central National Library of Florence (BNCF). BNCF is involving in the renewal of the most used subject indexing tool of Italian libraries. The project had already produced a Feasibility Study, representing a reference for the works which have started recently. An Italian abstract of the Feasibility Study, and more documentation, can be found in the BCNF website at the Web address <http://www bncf.firenze.sbn.it/progetti/>. Together with the project team and the BNCF staff, some young external consultants are working, who are focusing on the terminological component of the system, namely the prototype of the Thesaurus. At the same time, documents are produced which define procedures, establish criteria, and give guidelines. The list of items by which the prototype started consists of: - the terms included in the updates provided by the Italian National Bibliography (BNI) during the period 1986-1998 (already published in the form of lists); - the items introduced from 1999 to 2005 - other items introduced in the past years but never recorded; - some terms from the Soggettario (1956) or from BNI updates (1956-19S5), being especially outdated and needing revision. In building the semantic networks and the hierarchies, and in making the terminological control, of course, more terms have to be included, which come from the Soggettario, the BNI and other authoritative sources both catalographic (various indexing tools) and lexicographic (general and special directories). DDC numbers are also related to the terms in the Thesaurus. The prototype, to be completed in April 2006, will include a sample of terms for each disciplinary area. About 5000 terms will have a complete structure, but 6000 more will be included in the Thesaurus in order to fill the semantic networks, and marked with a different working status. For the prototype the AgroVoc software is used, which has been provided by FAO and adapted by the BNCF computing staff in order to match the specific requirements of the project. Thanks to the potential of this software, we intend to test in future on the multilingual side of terminology. Such work is likely to begin by testing links to the corresponding forms used by the Library of Congress. We are currently beginning to focus on this, and we wish that external parties be involved which are concerned with multilingual terminology in more or less specialistic contexts. We will follow the road of conventions with Italian universities, which could cooperate to this development through their students and graded students. We are also looking at the developments in the work of the British BSI working group on standards for thesauri convened by Stella Dextre Clarke.
Testing on the syntactic component of the language is in progress, carried out by a team working on the basis of some terms of the Thesaurus which have been identified for possessing some special features. This will maybe lead to some changes and simplifications in the original structures coming from the GRIS model <http://wwwaib.it/aib/commiss/gris/ guida.htm> and the Feasibility Study. Within June 2006, two basic documents will be published: - a paper volume containing the Rules, concerning both terminology and syntax, explanations of the Thesaurus, criteria, choices made about the categories and the width of the semantic network, etc.; - a CD containing the Thesaurus. One side of great interest will be the c-learning process of the indexing language of the new Soggettario. This has to be undertaken only after the prototype stage is done. At that time, once the text of the Rules will have been published, it will be possible for the system to spread, to be learned, and to be tested by various indexers and partners.

0.009652025 = product of:
  0.043434113 = sum of:
    0.014818345 = weight(_text_:of in 1395) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.014818345 = score(doc=1395,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.24188137 = fieldWeight in 1395, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1395)
    0.028615767 = weight(_text_:systems in 1395) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028615767 = score(doc=1395,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.23767869 = fieldWeight in 1395, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1395)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

This article deals with the meaningful processing of information in relation to two systems of Information processing: pre-coordination and post-coordination. The different approaches are discussed, with emphasis an the need for a controlled vocabulary in information retrieval. Assigned indexing, which employs a controlled vocabulary, is described in detail. Types of indexing language can be divided into two broad groups - those using pre-coordinated terms and those depending an post-coordination. They represent two different basic approaches in processing and Information retrieval. The historical development of these two approaches is described, as well as the two tools that apply to these approaches: thesauri and subject headings.

0.0094423 = product of:
  0.04249035 = sum of:
    0.017962547 = weight(_text_:of in 5611) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017962547 = score(doc=5611,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.2932045 = fieldWeight in 5611, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5611)
    0.0245278 = weight(_text_:systems in 5611) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0245278 = score(doc=5611,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.2037246 = fieldWeight in 5611, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5611)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

The IFLA Section on Classification and Indexing's Working Group on Principles Underlying Subject Headings Languages has identified a set of eleven principles for subject heading languages and excerpted the texts that match each principle from the instructions for each of eleven national subject indexing systems, including excerpts from the LC's Subject Cataloging Manual: Subject Headings. This study compares the IFLA principles with other texts that express the principles underlying LCSH, especially Library of Congress Subject Headings: Principles of Structure and Policies for Application, prepared by Lois Mai Chan for the Library of Congress in 1990, Chan's later book on LCSH, and earlier documents by Haykin and Cutter. The principles are further elaborated for clarity and discussed

Source

The LCSH century: one hundred years with the Library of Congress Subject Headings system. Ed.: A.T. Stone

0.0091887545 = product of:
  0.041349396 = sum of:
    0.016567415 = weight(_text_:of in 3750) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016567415 = score(doc=3750,freq=40.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.2704316 = fieldWeight in 3750, product of:
          6.3245554 = tf(freq=40.0), with freq of:
            40.0 = termFreq=40.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3750)
    0.024781981 = weight(_text_:systems in 3750) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.024781981 = score(doc=3750,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.12039685 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.20583579 = fieldWeight in 3750, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          3.0731742 = idf(docFreq=5561, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=3750)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

As an Italian chapter of ISKO has recently been reorganized, I was kindly invited to Write a short report an current KO activities in our country. So, in the following, I will briefly illustrate the local situation of the various kinds of knowledge organization systems, as well as related developments and activities. I am grateful to Paola Capitani, Emanuela Casson, Michele Santoro, and Lorena Zuccolo for providing useful information to be included here.

Content

"Subject headings Many Italian libraries create subject headings for their catalogues, using as a reference guide the "Soggettario per i catalogui delle biblioteche italiane." This is basically a list of subject terms created by the Biblioteca nazionale centrale di Firenze (BNCF), first published in 1956 and later updated with various lists of new subject headings. Though the Soggettario is still the main available reference, librarians are generally aware that it is outdated in both vocabulary and structure, especially as it does not provide explicit principles and rules to create and combine subject headings. A research group, called the Gruppo di ricerca sull'indicizzazione per soggetto (GRIS), was founded in 1990. It was devoted to improving the principles and consistency of subject indexing. Its members have performed in depth investigations of the structure of subject headings, starting with the principles of facet analysis used in PRECIS and including original developments. Results of their work are coded into the Guida all'indicizzazione per soggetto, published in 1996 and available also online <http:// wwwaib.it/aib/commiss/gris/gulda.htm>. The GRIS guide does not concern vocabulary, but morphological and syntactical rules for choosing and combining terms according to a sound citation order, based an a "role scheme." Unfortunately, GRIS principles have been applied only in a small number of libraries, mainly in Tuscany, rohere most GRIS members are located. A new project is now attempting to blend the traditional authority of the Soggettario with the more advanced principles of GRIS. A working group has been formed with people from BNCF, GRIS, and others, to study the feasibility of a renewal of the Soggettario. The group produced a report book in 2002, specifying the desirable features of the new system, and is at present searching for grants to implement it.
Terminology and thesauri BNCF is also involved in a working group collecting information an online terminological resources <http://wwwindire.it/websemantico>. The group is headed by Paola Capitani, and has organized several roundtables an terminology in special domains, such as economy, fashion, law, and education. Thesauri are generally poorly known and used in Italy, although there are significant exceptions: among faceted systems we can mention the "Thesauro italiano di sociologia," published in 1999, and the "Thesaurus regionale toscano," as well as specialized an social sciences including a general outline, available both in print (1996) and online <http:// www regione.toscana.it/ius/ns-thesaurus/>. Classification systems The Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC) is by far the most widespread classification scheme in Italian libraries. A working group, coordinated by Luigi Crocetti, regularly translates the new editions of DDC manuals, and gives refresher courses an it for librarians. BNCF makes DDC numbers for bibliographical records both of its own catalogue, and of the national bibliography (= Bibliografia nazionale italiana: BNI), which is available for other libraries in a CD-ROM edition. A very large number of public libraries use DDC for their shelfmarks, so that users are accustomed to it. This situation is different from other European countries, e.g., Spain where UDC is widespread."

0.0075302785 = product of:
  0.033886254 = sum of:
    0.017962547 = weight(_text_:of in 2205) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017962547 = score(doc=2205,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.2932045 = fieldWeight in 2205, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2205)
    0.015923709 = product of:
      0.031847417 = sum of:
        0.031847417 = weight(_text_:22 in 2205) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.031847417 = score(doc=2205,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13719016 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2205, 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=2205)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

Form subdivisions have always been an important part of the Library of Congress Subject Headings. However, when the MARC format was developed, no separate subfield code to identify form subdivisions was defined. Form and topical subdivisions were both included within a general subdivision category. In 1995, the USMARC Advisory Group approved a proposal defining subfield v for form subdivisions, and in 1999 the Library of Congress (LC) began identifying form subdivisions with the new code. However, there are millions of older bibliographic records lacking the explicit form subdivision coding. Identifying form subdivisions retrospectively is not a simple task. An algorithmic method was developed to identify form subdivisions coded as general subdivisions. The algorithm was used to identify 2,563 unique form subdivisions or combinations of form subdivisions in OCLC's WorldCat. The algorithm proved to be highly accurate with an error rate estimated to be less than 0.1%. The observed usage of the form subdivisions was highly skewed with the 100 most used form subdivisions or combinations of subdivisions accounting for 90% of the assignments.

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.0075302785 = product of:
  0.033886254 = sum of:
    0.017962547 = weight(_text_:of in 3837) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017962547 = score(doc=3837,freq=16.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.2932045 = fieldWeight in 3837, product of:
          4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
            16.0 = termFreq=16.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3837)
    0.015923709 = product of:
      0.031847417 = sum of:
        0.031847417 = weight(_text_:22 in 3837) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.031847417 = score(doc=3837,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13719016 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3837, 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=3837)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

Library of Congress Subject Headings (LSCH), which celebrated its 100th birthday in 1998, is the largest cataloging and indexing language in the world for the indication of the topics and formats of books and similar publications. It consists of a controlled list of main headings, many with subdivisions, with a rich system of cross references. It is supported by the U.S. government, and undergoes systematic revision. In recent decades its managers have begun to confront challenges such as biased terminology, complicated syntax (how terms are put together to form headings), and effective displays in electronic media. Many suggestions have been made for its improvement, including moving to a fully faceted system.

Date

27. 8.2011 14:22:13

Source

Encyclopedia of library and information sciences. 3rd ed. Ed.: M.J. Bates

0.0072724735 = product of:
  0.03272613 = sum of:
    0.016802425 = weight(_text_:of in 5618) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016802425 = score(doc=5618,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.2742677 = fieldWeight in 5618, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5618)
    0.015923709 = product of:
      0.031847417 = sum of:
        0.031847417 = weight(_text_:22 in 5618) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.031847417 = score(doc=5618,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13719016 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 5618, 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=5618)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

A study group representing four European national libraries (the Swiss National Library, Die Deutsche Bibliothek, the Bibliothèque nationale de France and The British Library) recently conducted a study on the possibility of establishing multilingual thesaural links between the headings in the LCSH authority file and the authority files of the German indexing system SWD/RSWK and the French indexing system RAMEAU. The study demonstrated a high level of correspondence in main headings, but also revealed a number of issues requiring further investigation. The study group's findings led to recommendations on the scope for the development of a prototype system for linking the three Subject Heading Languages (SHLs) in the databases of the four institutions

Date

27. 5.2001 16:22:10

Source

The LCSH century: one hundred years with the Library of Congress Subject Headings system. Ed.: A.T.Stone

0.0072724735 = product of:
  0.03272613 = sum of:
    0.016802425 = weight(_text_:of in 5920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.016802425 = score(doc=5920,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.2742677 = fieldWeight in 5920, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5920)
    0.015923709 = product of:
      0.031847417 = sum of:
        0.031847417 = weight(_text_:22 in 5920) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.031847417 = score(doc=5920,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13719016 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03917671 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 5920, 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=5920)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.22222222 = coord(2/9)

Abstract

Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH), a system originally designed as a tool for subject access to the Library's own collection in the late nineteenth century, has become, in the course of the last century, the main subject retrieval tool in library catalogs throughout the United States and in many other countries. It is one of the largest non-specialized controlled vocabularies in the world. As LCSH enters a new century, it faces an information environment that has undergone vast changes from what had prevailed when LCSH began, or, indeed, from its state in the early days of the online age. In order to continue its mission and to be useful in spheres outside library catalogs as well, LCSH must adapt to the multifarious environment. One possible approach is to adopt a series of scalable and flexible syntax and application rules to meet the needs of different user communities

Date

27. 5.2001 16:22:21

Source

The LCSH century: one hundred years with the Library of Congress Subject Headings system. Ed.: A.T.Stone

0.0026033178 = product of:
  0.023429861 = sum of:
    0.023429861 = weight(_text_:of in 5607) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.023429861 = score(doc=5607,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.38244802 = fieldWeight in 5607, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5607)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)

Abstract

Many kinds of structure can be discerned in the headings and rules governing the Library of Congress Subject Headings. By addressing these structures at different levels, librarians can develop different approaches to the machine-assisted validation of subject headings, from the checking of individual words to the validation of complex forms of heading/subdivision compatibility. Using computer programs to assist with maintenance of subject headings is becoming increasingly necessary as technical services librarians strive to create consistent and useful patterns of subject collocation in library catalogs

Source

The LCSH century: one hundred years with the Library of Congress Subject Headings system. Ed.: A.T.Stone

0.0024443932 = product of:
  0.021999538 = sum of:
    0.021999538 = weight(_text_:of in 6576) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021999538 = score(doc=6576,freq=24.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.3591007 = fieldWeight in 6576, product of:
          4.8989797 = tf(freq=24.0), with freq of:
            24.0 = termFreq=24.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=6576)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)

Abstract

The nature of a library's collections determines what kind of subject access to provide to those collections. The collections of the Cleveland Public Library serve both the recreational and research needs of a large urban population. The Cleveland Public Library uses Library of Congress Subject Headings to describe its collections. A study of subject searches entered by library patrons over the course of one week reveals several patterns among the types of subject headings used most frequently, reflecting the characteristics of the population served. Other topics discussed include subject access to fiction, juvenileliterature, and specialized collections

Source

The LCSH century: one hundred years with the Library of Congress Subject Headings system. Ed.: A.T.Stone

0.0023521183 = product of:
  0.021169065 = sum of:
    0.021169065 = weight(_text_:of in 1274) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.021169065 = score(doc=1274,freq=32.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.34554482 = fieldWeight in 1274, product of:
          5.656854 = tf(freq=32.0), with freq of:
            32.0 = termFreq=32.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1274)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)

Abstract

Over the last ten years, the Servizio Bibliotecario Nazionale (SBN) has become the largest Italian network of bibliographic services. The creation of the SBN Index database and its growth through shared cataloging were the focus of attention during the early phase, and for years, discussion was limited to questions of author cataloging and bibliographic description. Subject cataloging was excluded from the cooperative activity of the member libraries. In 1990 the Working Group on Subject Headings and Classes was established to examine this situation. First, a partial solution was found, to permit the launch of the network itself. This was followed, several years later, by the development of the SBN OPAC and the creation of the file of subject headings and classes in the SBN Index. From an operational perspective, the choice was made to forego managing the subject headings file in accordance with shared cataloging principles, with mixed results. In order for the subject file to have broader coverage and to further encourage cooperative subject cataloging, the SBN Index Development Program, in which the Istituto Centrale per il Catalogo Unico delle Biblioteche Italiane (ICCU) has been engaged for about two years, aims at enriching services of the database and opening up new and diversified types of usage. Almost simultaneously the Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale di Firenze (BNCF) initiated a feasibility study on the revision of the Soggettario delle biblioteche italiane (List of Subject Headings in Italian Libraries) for the catalogs of Italian libraries. Both the BNCF and the ICCU share the goal of building a new, consistent vocabulary for documentation of subject matter.

0.0022314154 = product of:
  0.020082738 = sum of:
    0.020082738 = weight(_text_:of in 5427) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020082738 = score(doc=5427,freq=20.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.32781258 = fieldWeight in 5427, product of:
          4.472136 = tf(freq=20.0), with freq of:
            20.0 = termFreq=20.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5427)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)

Abstract

The syntactic and semantic consistency of the subject headings of Library of Congress is a matter of concern to cataloguers who must use appropriate terminologies to describe library materials undergoing processing. This paper looks at the structure of these headings by analyzing comparatively the syntactic types that make up the structures as listed in Literature and Librarianship on pages 3075 to 3085 and 3114 to 3117 respectively. Their semantic implications are also highlighted. Consistency and specificity are terms often used in criticizing LCSH. This paper examines the application of these two concepts on the structures believing that a thorough understanding of the syntactic types would help the cataloguer to determine the most appropriate and specific heading to use.

0.0022002053 = product of:
  0.019801848 = sum of:
    0.019801848 = weight(_text_:of in 5738) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019801848 = score(doc=5738,freq=28.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.32322758 = fieldWeight in 5738, product of:
          5.2915025 = tf(freq=28.0), with freq of:
            28.0 = termFreq=28.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5738)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)

Abstract

This classified critical bibliography continues the work initiated by Monika Kirtland and Pauline Cochrane, and furthered by Steven Blake Shubert. Kirtland and Cochrane published a bibliography surveying the literature critical of LCSH from 1944-1979 titled "Critical Views of LCSH - Library of Congress Subject Headings, A Bibliographic and Bibliometric Essay." Shubert analyzed another decade of literature in his article titled "Critical Views of LCSH-Ten Years Later: A Bibliographic Essay." This current bibliography compiles the next twelve years of critical literature from 1990-2001. Persistent concerns of the past fifty-seven years include inadequate syndetic structure, currency or bias of the headings, and lack of specificity in the subject heading list. New developments and research are in the areas of subdivisions, mapping, indexer inconsistency, and post-coordination. LCSH must become more flexible and easier to use in order to increase its scalability and interoperability as an online subject searching tool.

Footnote

Vgl. auch die Vorgänger: Kirtland, M., P.A. Cochrane: Critical views of LCSH - Library of Congress Subject Headings: a bibliographic and bibliometric essay. In: Cataloging and classification quarterly. 1(1982) no.2/3, S.71-93. Shubert, S.B.: Critical views of LCSH - ten years later: a bibliographic essay. In: Cataloging and classification quarterly. 15(1992) no.2, S.37-97.

0.0021780923 = product of:
  0.01960283 = sum of:
    0.01960283 = weight(_text_:of in 5610) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.01960283 = score(doc=5610,freq=14.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.31997898 = fieldWeight in 5610, product of:
          3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
            14.0 = termFreq=14.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5610)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)

Abstract

The Library of Congress Subject Headings have traditionally attempted to reflect reality neutrally. The result is bias in representing cultural margins. While neutrality is one of the ethical stances espoused by librarianship, another is universal and equitable access to information for the betterment of humanity. This paper views LCSH as a potential tool for cultural change using Homi Bhabha's postcolonial concept of a Third Space as a model. LCSH functions as a Third Space where the meanings of documents are constructed and enunciated for library users. Therefore, it is in LCSH that there is potential for instigating change

Source

The LCSH century: one hundred years with the Library of Congress Subject Headings system. Ed.: A.T. Stone

0.0021169065 = product of:
  0.019052157 = sum of:
    0.019052157 = weight(_text_:of in 5609) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019052157 = score(doc=5609,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.3109903 = fieldWeight in 5609, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5609)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)

Abstract

In 1986 Libraries Unlimited published Cochrane's book, Improving LCSH for Use in Online Catalogs; Exercises for Self-Help with a Selection of Background Readings. This was preceded in 1981 by an ERIC publication (ED 208 900) by Cochrane, with Monika Kirtland Bibliographic and Bibliometric Essay which documented critical views of LCSH and an analysis of vocabulary control in LCSH (parts of which were published in Cataloging & Classification Quarterly' 1(2/3) (1982), 71-94). Three features of LCSH will be re-examined to check on progress since the time of these earlier publications: notes, structure of relationships between headings in the list, and links between Library of Congress classification numbers and LCSH or other vocabularies

Source

The LCSH century: one hundred years with the Library of Congress Subject Headings system. Ed.: A.T. Stone

0.0021169065 = product of:
  0.019052157 = sum of:
    0.019052157 = weight(_text_:of in 5919) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019052157 = score(doc=5919,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.3109903 = fieldWeight in 5919, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5919)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)

Abstract

An understanding of the workings of Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH) is one of the most valuable conceptual tools a researcher can have. The subject heading system is by no means obvious or self-evident, however; it must be taught, explained, and exemplified by librarians. Several points must be covered explicitly. The cross-reference notation of UF, BT, RT, SA, and NT has to be explained; the importance of choosing the most specific heading available, rather than a general term, must also be emphasized. There are four ways to find the most specific LCSH terms for a particular topic; two of them come from using the red books, two from using the online catalog itself. All four ways are important; none is obvious. Each must be taught

Source

The LCSH century: one hundred years with the Library of Congress Subject Headings system. Ed.: A.T.Stone

0.0021169065 = product of:
  0.019052157 = sum of:
    0.019052157 = weight(_text_:of in 5921) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.019052157 = score(doc=5921,freq=18.0), product of:
        0.061262865 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03917671 = queryNorm
        0.3109903 = fieldWeight in 5921, product of:
          4.2426405 = tf(freq=18.0), with freq of:
            18.0 = termFreq=18.0
          1.5637573 = idf(docFreq=25162, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5921)
  0.11111111 = coord(1/9)

Abstract

Surveys conducted during the last four years under the auspices of the International Federation of Library Associations and Organizations (IFLA) reveal that the Library of Congress Subject Headings is heavily used in national libraries outside of the United States, particularly in English-speaking countries. Many other countries report using a translation or adaptation of LCSH as their principal subject heading language. Magda Heiner-Freiling presents an analysis of the IFLA data, which also includes information on the classification schemes used by the libraries and whether or not the libraries have produced a manual on the creation and application of subject headings. The paper concludes with an Appendix showing the complete data from the 88 national libraries that respond to the surveys

Object

Sears List of Subject Headings

Source

The LCSH century: one hundred years with the Library of Congress Subject Headings system. Ed.: A.T.Stone