Search (112 results, page 1 of 6)

  • × theme_ss:"Datenformate"
  1. Troxler, W.: Einige Erfahrungen aus dem Informationsverbund Deutschsschweiz (IDS) (2002) 0.03
    0.032874495 = product of:
      0.23012145 = sum of:
        0.23012145 = weight(_text_:mehrsprachigkeit in 1093) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.23012145 = score(doc=1093,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.3070917 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03622214 = queryNorm
            0.7493574 = fieldWeight in 1093, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1093)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Abstract
    Die Katalogsituation in der Schweiz ist in verschiedenen Bereichen uneinheitlicher als in Deutschland. Dies liegt vor allem an der Mehrsprachigkeit, am Fehlen von schweizerischen Normdateien und am Fehlen von einheitlichen Sacherschließungssystemen. Das Folgende beschränkt sich deshalb auf die Situation im Informationsverbund Deutschschweiz (IDS).
  2. Mishra, K.S.: Bibliographic databases and exchange formats (1997) 0.01
    0.007423487 = product of:
      0.025982203 = sum of:
        0.006351802 = product of:
          0.03175901 = sum of:
            0.03175901 = weight(_text_:system in 1757) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03175901 = score(doc=1757,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.11408355 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03622214 = queryNorm
                0.27838376 = fieldWeight in 1757, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1757)
          0.2 = coord(1/5)
        0.0196304 = product of:
          0.0392608 = sum of:
            0.0392608 = weight(_text_:22 in 1757) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0392608 = score(doc=1757,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.12684377 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03622214 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 1757, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1757)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    Abstract
    Computers play an important role in the development of bibliographic databases. Exchange formats are needed for the generation and exchange of bibliographic data at different levels: international, national, regional and local. Discusses the formats available at national and international level such as the International Standard Exchange Format (ISO 2709); the various MARC formats and the Common Communication Format (CCF). Work on Indian standards involving the Bureau of Indian Standards, the National Information System for Science and Technology (NISSAT) and other institutions proceeds only slowly
    Source
    DESIDOC bulletin of information technology. 17(1997) no.5, S.17-22
  3. Coyle, K.: Future considerations : the functional library systems record (2004) 0.01
    0.007423487 = product of:
      0.025982203 = sum of:
        0.006351802 = product of:
          0.03175901 = sum of:
            0.03175901 = weight(_text_:system in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03175901 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.11408355 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03622214 = queryNorm
                0.27838376 = fieldWeight in 562, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=562)
          0.2 = coord(1/5)
        0.0196304 = product of:
          0.0392608 = sum of:
            0.0392608 = weight(_text_:22 in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0392608 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.12684377 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03622214 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 562, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=562)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    Abstract
    The paper performs a thought experiment on the concept of a record based on the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records and library system functions, and concludes that if we want to develop a functional bibliographic record we need to do it within the context of a flexible, functional library systems record structure. The article suggests a new way to look at the library systems record that would allow libraries to move forward in terms of technology but also in terms of serving library users.
    Source
    Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2, S.166-174
  4. Bales, K.: ¬The USMARC formats and visual materials (1989) 0.01
    0.007282694 = product of:
      0.025489427 = sum of:
        0.0058590267 = product of:
          0.029295133 = sum of:
            0.029295133 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 2861) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.029295133 = score(doc=2861,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.109568894 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03622214 = queryNorm
                0.26736724 = fieldWeight in 2861, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2861)
          0.2 = coord(1/5)
        0.0196304 = product of:
          0.0392608 = sum of:
            0.0392608 = weight(_text_:22 in 2861) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0392608 = score(doc=2861,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.12684377 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03622214 = queryNorm
                0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2861, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2861)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    Abstract
    Paper presented at a symposium on 'Implementing the Art and Architecture Thesaurus (AAT): Controlled Vocabulary in the Extended MARC format', held at the 1989 Annual Conference of the Art Libraries Society of North America. Describes how changes are effected in MARC and the role of the various groups in the library community that are involved in the implementing these changes. Discusses the expansion of the formats to accomodate cataloguing and retrieval for visual materials. Expanded capabilities for coding visual materials offer greater opportunity for user access.
    Date
    4.12.1995 22:40:20
  5. UNIMARC and CDS/ISIS : Proceedings of the Workshops held in Budapest, 21.-22. June 1993 and Barcelona, 26. August 1993 (1994) 0.01
    0.0064955507 = product of:
      0.022734426 = sum of:
        0.0055578267 = product of:
          0.027789133 = sum of:
            0.027789133 = weight(_text_:system in 8779) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.027789133 = score(doc=8779,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.11408355 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03622214 = queryNorm
                0.2435858 = fieldWeight in 8779, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=8779)
          0.2 = coord(1/5)
        0.0171766 = product of:
          0.0343532 = sum of:
            0.0343532 = weight(_text_:22 in 8779) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0343532 = score(doc=8779,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.12684377 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03622214 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 8779, 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=8779)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    Content
    Enthält die Beiträge: CAMPOS, F.: UNIMARC: state of the art on the universal format for international exchange; HOLT, B.: The maintenance of UNIMARC; WILLER, M.: UNIMARC / Authorities format; HOPKINSON, A.: CDS/ISIS as a tool for implementing UNIMARC; BERKE, S. u. M. SIPOS: The comprehensive information system of the National Széchényi Library and the Hungarian MARC format; SHRAIBERG, Y.: Application of the CDS/ISIS software package and UNIMARC format in the automated systems of the Russian National Public Library for Science and Technology and other libraries of the Russian Federation; STOKLASOVA, B.: Exchange formats in the Czech Republic: past, present and future
  6. Jimenez, V.O.R.: Nuevas perspectivas para la catalogacion : metadatos ver MARC (1999) 0.01
    0.00594891 = product of:
      0.041642368 = sum of:
        0.041642368 = product of:
          0.083284736 = sum of:
            0.083284736 = weight(_text_:22 in 5743) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.083284736 = score(doc=5743,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.12684377 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03622214 = queryNorm
                0.6565931 = fieldWeight in 5743, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=5743)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Date
    30. 3.2002 19:45:22
    Source
    Revista Española de Documentaçion Cientifica. 22(1999) no.2, S.198-219
  7. MARC and metadata : METS, MODS, and MARCXML: current and future implications (2004) 0.01
    0.0056086862 = product of:
      0.0392608 = sum of:
        0.0392608 = product of:
          0.0785216 = sum of:
            0.0785216 = weight(_text_:22 in 2840) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0785216 = score(doc=2840,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.12684377 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03622214 = queryNorm
                0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 2840, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=2840)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Source
    Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1
  8. Riva, P.: Mapping MARC 21 linking entry fields to FRBR and Tillett's taxonomy of bibliographic relationships (2004) 0.01
    0.005567615 = product of:
      0.01948665 = sum of:
        0.0047638514 = product of:
          0.023819257 = sum of:
            0.023819257 = weight(_text_:system in 136) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.023819257 = score(doc=136,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.11408355 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03622214 = queryNorm
                0.20878783 = fieldWeight in 136, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=136)
          0.2 = coord(1/5)
        0.0147228 = product of:
          0.0294456 = sum of:
            0.0294456 = weight(_text_:22 in 136) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0294456 = score(doc=136,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.12684377 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03622214 = queryNorm
                0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 136, 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=136)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.2857143 = coord(2/7)
    
    Abstract
    Bibliographic relationships have taken on even greater importance in the context of ongoing efforts to integrate concepts from the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) into cataloging codes and database structures. In MARC 21, the linking entry fields are a major mechanism for expressing relationships between bibliographic records. Taxonomies of bibliographic relationships have been proposed by Tillett, with an extension by Smiraglia, and in FRBR itself. The present exercise is to provide a detailed bidirectional mapping of the MARC 21 linking fields to these two schemes. The correspondence of the Tillett taxonomic divisions to the MARC categorization of the linking fields as chronological, horizontal, or vertical is examined as well. Application of the findings to MARC format development and system functionality is discussed.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  9. Kernernman, V.Y.; Koenig, M.E.D.: USMARC as a standardized format for the Internet hypermedia document control/retrieval/delivery system design (1996) 0.01
    0.0052473797 = product of:
      0.036731657 = sum of:
        0.036731657 = product of:
          0.091829136 = sum of:
            0.036250874 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5565) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.036250874 = score(doc=5565,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.109568894 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03622214 = queryNorm
                0.33085006 = fieldWeight in 5565, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5565)
            0.055578265 = weight(_text_:system in 5565) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.055578265 = score(doc=5565,freq=8.0), product of:
                0.11408355 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03622214 = queryNorm
                0.4871716 = fieldWeight in 5565, product of:
                  2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                    8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                  3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5565)
          0.4 = coord(2/5)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Abstract
    Surveys how the USMARC integrated bibliographic format (UBIF) could be mapped onto an hypermedia document USMARC format (HDUF) to meet the requirements of a hypermedia document control/retrieval/delivery (HDRD) system for the Internet. Explores the characteristics of such a system using an example of the WWW's directory and searching engine Yahoo!. Discusses additional standard specifications for the UBIF's structure, content designation, and data content to map this format into the HDUF that can serve as a proxy for the Net HDRD system
  10. MARC and metadata : METS, MODS, and MARCXML: current and future implications (2004) 0.00
    0.0049076 = product of:
      0.0343532 = sum of:
        0.0343532 = product of:
          0.0687064 = sum of:
            0.0687064 = weight(_text_:22 in 7196) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0687064 = score(doc=7196,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.12684377 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03622214 = queryNorm
                0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 7196, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=7196)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Source
    Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1
  11. Geißelmann, F.: Arbeitsergebnisse der Arbeitsgruppe Codes (2000) 0.00
    0.0049076 = product of:
      0.0343532 = sum of:
        0.0343532 = product of:
          0.0687064 = sum of:
            0.0687064 = weight(_text_:22 in 4973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0687064 = score(doc=4973,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.12684377 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03622214 = queryNorm
                0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 4973, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4973)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Date
    26. 8.2000 19:22:35
  12. Weber, R.: "Functional requirements for bibliographic records" und Regelwerksentwicklung (2001) 0.00
    0.0049076 = product of:
      0.0343532 = sum of:
        0.0343532 = product of:
          0.0687064 = sum of:
            0.0687064 = weight(_text_:22 in 6838) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0687064 = score(doc=6838,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.12684377 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03622214 = queryNorm
                0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 6838, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=6838)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Source
    Dialog mit Bibliotheken. 13(2001) H.3, S.20-22
  13. MARC and metadata : METS, MODS, and MARCXML: current and future implications part 2 (2004) 0.00
    0.0049076 = product of:
      0.0343532 = sum of:
        0.0343532 = product of:
          0.0687064 = sum of:
            0.0687064 = weight(_text_:22 in 2841) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0687064 = score(doc=2841,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.12684377 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03622214 = queryNorm
                0.5416616 = fieldWeight in 2841, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=2841)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Source
    Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2
  14. Byrne, D.J.: MARC manual : understanding and using MARC records (1998) 0.00
    0.0042065145 = product of:
      0.0294456 = sum of:
        0.0294456 = product of:
          0.0588912 = sum of:
            0.0588912 = weight(_text_:22 in 6077) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.0588912 = score(doc=6077,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.12684377 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03622214 = queryNorm
                0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 6077, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=6077)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Date
    2. 8.2001 16:22:33
  15. Richter, S.: ¬Die formale Beschreibung von Dokumenten in Archiven und Bibliotheken : Perspektiven des Datenaustauschs (2004) 0.00
    0.004066495 = product of:
      0.028465465 = sum of:
        0.028465465 = product of:
          0.05693093 = sum of:
            0.05693093 = weight(_text_:zugriff in 4982) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.05693093 = score(doc=4982,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.2160124 = queryWeight, product of:
                  5.963546 = idf(docFreq=308, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03622214 = queryNorm
                0.26355398 = fieldWeight in 4982, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  5.963546 = idf(docFreq=308, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4982)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Abstract
    Die Datenrecherche und der Zugriff auf Informationen wurde in den letzten Jahren durch Angebote im Internet erleichtert. Während im Bibliothekswesen bereits seit Jahrzehnten Erfahrungen durch die Verbundkatalogisierung im Bereich des Datenaustauschs gesammelt wurden, wurde eine kooperative Datenhaltung zwischen Archiven erst in den letzten Jahren begonnen. In dieser Arbeit wird der Frage nachgegangen, inwieweit Daten aus Archiven und Bibliotheken in gemeinsamen Datenpools angeboten werden können: Sind die Inhalte der verschiedenen Datenkategorien ähnlich genug, um sie zusammenfassen zu können? Welche Standards liegen den Daten zugrunde? Um diese Fragen beantworten zu können, werden zunächst die verschiedenen Regelwerke des Archivs- und Bibliothekswesens zur archivischen Verzeichnung bzw. der bibliographischen Beschreibung untersucht und anschließend die darauf fußenden Austauschformate. Folgende (Regel-) Werke werden in die Analyse integiert: Papritz: Die archivische Titelaufnahme bei Sachakten, die Ordnungs- und Verzeichnungsgrundsätze für die staatlichen Archive der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik (OVG-DDR), Internationale Grundsätze für die archivische Verzeichnung (ISAD(G)), das Handbuch für Wirtschaftsarchive, Praktische Archivkunde, die Regeln für die alphabetische Katalogisierung in wissenschaftlichen Bibliotheken (RAK-WB), die Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules (AACR), General International Standard Bibliographic Description (ISBD(G)) und für den Bereich der Nachlasserschließung als Schnittstelle zwischen Archiven und Bibliotheken die Ordnungs- und Verzeichnungsgrundsätze [des Goethe- und Schiller-Archivs] (OVG-GSA), König: Verwaltung und wissenschaftliche Erschließung von Nachlässen in Literaturarchiven sowie die Regeln zur Erschließung von Nachlässen und Autographen (RNA). Von den Datenaustauschformaten werden Encoded Archival Description (EAD), Maschinelles Austauschformat für Bibliotheken (MAB) und Machine Readable Cataloguing (MARC) vorgestellt. Die Analyse zeigt, dass Daten aus Archiven und Bibliotheken in einer gemeinsamen Datenmenge zur Verfügung gestellt werden können, um sie für eine spartenübergreifende Recherche nutzbar zu machen. Es muss aber eingeräumt werden, dass im Austauschformat für ähnliche Beschreibungselemente nicht identische Kategorienummern verwendet werden können, da hierfür die Inhalte der Kategorien zu stark differieren. Aus diesem Grund kann das MAB-Format auch nicht ohne weiteres für archivische Elemente verwendet werden: Entweder müsste das bestehende MAB-Schema an die Belange des Archivwesens angepasst werden oder es müsste ein neues Austauschformat generiert werden, da auch das internationale EAD-Format nicht ohne Änderungen auf die deutsche Verzeichnungstradition abgebildet werden kann. Insbesondere wäre sowohl innerhalb der Sparten Archiv- und Bibliothekswesen als auch darüber hinaus eine tiefere Diskussion um verbindliche Regelwerke und Austauschformate zu empfehlen.
  16. Leazer, G.H.: ¬A conceptual schema for the control of bibliographic works (1994) 0.00
    0.004057089 = product of:
      0.028399622 = sum of:
        0.028399622 = product of:
          0.070999056 = sum of:
            0.03661892 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3033) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.03661892 = score(doc=3033,freq=8.0), product of:
                0.109568894 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03622214 = queryNorm
                0.33420905 = fieldWeight in 3033, product of:
                  2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                    8.0 = termFreq=8.0
                  3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3033)
            0.034380134 = weight(_text_:system in 3033) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.034380134 = score(doc=3033,freq=6.0), product of:
                0.11408355 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03622214 = queryNorm
                0.30135927 = fieldWeight in 3033, product of:
                  2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                    6.0 = termFreq=6.0
                  3.1495528 = idf(docFreq=5152, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3033)
          0.4 = coord(2/5)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Abstract
    In this paper I describe a conceptual design of a bibliographic retrieval system that enables more thourough control of bibliographic entities. A bibliographic entity has 2 components: the intellectual work and the physical item. Users searching bibliographic retrieval systems generally do not search for a specific item, but are willing to retrieve one of several alternative manifestations of a work. However, contemporary bibliographic retrieval systems are based solely on the descriptions of items. Works are described only implcitly by collocating descriptions of items. This method has resulted in a tool that does not include important descriptive attributes of the work, e.g. information regarding its history, its genre, or its bibliographic relationships. A bibliographic relationship is an association between 2 bibliographic entities. A system evaluation methodology wasused to create a conceptual schema for a bibliographic retrieval system. The model is based upon an analysis of data elements in the USMARC Formats for Bibliographic Data. The conceptual schema describes a database comprising 2 separate files of bibliographic descriptions, one of works and the other of items. Each file consists of individual descriptive surrogates of their respective entities. the specific data content of each file is defined by a data dictionary. Data elements used in the description of bibliographic works reflect the nature of works as intellectual and linguistic objects. The descriptive elements of bibliographic items describe the physical properties of bibliographic entities. Bibliographic relationships constitute the logical strucutre of the database
  17. Caplan, P.; Guenther, R.: Metadata for Internet resources : the Dublin Core Metadata Elements Set and its mapping to USMARC (1996) 0.00
    0.00396594 = product of:
      0.027761579 = sum of:
        0.027761579 = product of:
          0.055523157 = sum of:
            0.055523157 = weight(_text_:22 in 2408) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.055523157 = score(doc=2408,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.12684377 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03622214 = queryNorm
                0.4377287 = fieldWeight in 2408, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2408)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Date
    13. 1.2007 18:31:22
    Source
    Cataloging and classification quarterly. 22(1996) nos.3/4, S.43-58
  18. Tennant, R.: ¬A bibliographic metadata infrastructure for the twenty-first century (2004) 0.00
    0.00396594 = product of:
      0.027761579 = sum of:
        0.027761579 = product of:
          0.055523157 = sum of:
            0.055523157 = weight(_text_:22 in 2845) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.055523157 = score(doc=2845,freq=4.0), product of:
                0.12684377 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03622214 = queryNorm
                0.4377287 = fieldWeight in 2845, product of:
                  2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                    4.0 = termFreq=4.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2845)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Date
    9.12.2005 19:22:38
    Source
    Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2, S.175-181
  19. Paulus, W.; Weishaupt, K.: Bibliotheksdaten werden mehr wert : LibLink wertet bibliothekarische Dienstleistung auf (1996) 0.00
    0.0035054288 = product of:
      0.024538001 = sum of:
        0.024538001 = product of:
          0.049076002 = sum of:
            0.049076002 = weight(_text_:22 in 5228) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.049076002 = score(doc=5228,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.12684377 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03622214 = queryNorm
                0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 5228, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5228)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Date
    29. 9.1996 18:58:22
  20. Hoffmann, L.: ¬Die Globalisierung macht vor der Katalogisierung nicht Halt : Mit AACR2 zum Global Player? (2003) 0.00
    0.0035054288 = product of:
      0.024538001 = sum of:
        0.024538001 = product of:
          0.049076002 = sum of:
            0.049076002 = weight(_text_:22 in 1544) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.049076002 = score(doc=1544,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.12684377 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.03622214 = queryNorm
                0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 1544, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=1544)
          0.5 = coord(1/2)
      0.14285715 = coord(1/7)
    
    Date
    22. 3.2016 12:15:46

Authors

Years

Languages

  • e 81
  • d 26
  • f 2
  • pl 1
  • sp 1
  • More… Less…

Types

  • a 97
  • el 5
  • s 5
  • m 3
  • b 2
  • n 2
  • l 1
  • x 1
  • More… Less…

Classifications