Search (32 results, page 1 of 2)

0.007805319 = product of:
  0.05463723 = sum of:
    0.05463723 = product of:
      0.08195584 = sum of:
        0.041163065 = weight(_text_:29 in 3053) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.041163065 = score(doc=3053,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13239008 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037635546 = queryNorm
            0.31092256 = fieldWeight in 3053, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3053)
        0.040792778 = weight(_text_:22 in 3053) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.040792778 = score(doc=3053,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13179328 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037635546 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3053, 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=3053)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Date

29. 1.1996 17:18:10
22. 2.1999 20:40:57

0.006829654 = product of:
  0.047807574 = sum of:
    0.047807574 = product of:
      0.07171136 = sum of:
        0.03601768 = weight(_text_:29 in 1934) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03601768 = score(doc=1934,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13239008 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037635546 = queryNorm
            0.27205724 = fieldWeight in 1934, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1934)
        0.03569368 = weight(_text_:22 in 1934) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03569368 = score(doc=1934,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13179328 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037635546 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 1934, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1934)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Date

29. 5.2015 11:08:22

0.00599311 = product of:
  0.020975884 = sum of:
    0.0089699915 = weight(_text_:information in 786) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0089699915 = score(doc=786,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.066068366 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037635546 = queryNorm
        0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 786, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=786)
    0.0120058935 = product of:
      0.03601768 = sum of:
        0.03601768 = weight(_text_:29 in 786) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03601768 = score(doc=786,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13239008 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037635546 = queryNorm
            0.27205724 = fieldWeight in 786, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=786)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)

Abstract

This paper discusses the professional and intellectual appeals demonstrated by cataloging students, as well as some common misconceptions. Given the current digital environment and the "Amazoogle" effect, students face many challenges when striving to complete a basic course in descriptive and subject cataloging. In the process, they face issues of varieties of information objects, how to tame tools such as AACR2 and LCSH, and how MARC encoding fits into the overall process of cataloging. They also must learn to re-conceptualize their ideas of copy cataloging and learn to appreciate the authoritative power that comes with using and applying cataloger's judgment.

Date

29. 9.2008 14:58:13

0.00599311 = product of:
  0.020975884 = sum of:
    0.0089699915 = weight(_text_:information in 1929) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0089699915 = score(doc=1929,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.066068366 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037635546 = queryNorm
        0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 1929, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1929)
    0.0120058935 = product of:
      0.03601768 = sum of:
        0.03601768 = weight(_text_:29 in 1929) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03601768 = score(doc=1929,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13239008 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037635546 = queryNorm
            0.27205724 = fieldWeight in 1929, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1929)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)

Abstract

This article analyzes the literature concerning uses of notes in bibliographic records and also certain grammatical conventions used by catalogers to communicate information about the resources they are describing. It shows that these types of data do not aid the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) user tasks in the resource discovery process. It also describes how general notes are addressed in Resource Description Access (RDA), and advocates that cataloging practices involving most general notes and such conventions as bracketing and abbreviations should be discontinued with the widespread use of RDA.

Date

29. 5.2015 13:21:31

0.005163667 = product of:
  0.018072832 = sum of:
    0.0066584917 = weight(_text_:information in 4530) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0066584917 = score(doc=4530,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.066068366 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037635546 = queryNorm
        0.10078184 = fieldWeight in 4530, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=4530)
    0.011414342 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4530) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011414342 = score(doc=4530,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.11384433 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037635546 = queryNorm
        0.10026272 = fieldWeight in 4530, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=4530)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)

Abstract

Library specialists in the cataloging and metadata professions have a greater purpose than simply managing information and connecting users to resources. There is a deeper and more profound impact that comes of their work: preservation of the human record. Conversations with Catalogers in the 21st Century contains four chapters addressing broad categories of issues that catalogers and metadata librarians are currently facing. Every important topic is covered, such as changing metadata practices, standards, data record structures, data platforms, and user expectations, providing both theoretical and practical information. Guidelines for dealing with present challenges are based on fundamentals from the past. Recommendations on training staff, building new information platforms of digital library resources, documenting new cataloging and metadata competencies, and establishing new workflows enable a real-world game plan for improvement.

Footnote

Rez. in Mitt VÖB 64(2011) H.1, S.151-153 (S. Breitling): "Wie sieht die Rolle der Katalogisierung im 21. Jahrhundert aus? In diversen Blogs und Mailinglisten wird darüber seit geraumer Zeit diskutiert. Der Bereich Katalogisierung befindet sich in einer Phase tiefgreifenden Wandels, ausgelöst durch eine Vielzahl von Faktoren, von denen veränderte Nutzererwartungen bei der Recherche und die wachsende Menge an neuen zu katalogisierenden Materialien (e-Books, Web-Ressourcen etc.) und Formaten nur zwei Aspekte darstellen. Das technische Umfeld wird nicht zuletzt durch fortgeschrittene Möglichkeiten im Bereich Retrieval und Präsentation geprägt. Wie schafft man es, dass Katalogisierung als Teil des gesamten Bibliothekswesens relevant und zeitgemäß bleibt? Welche der in Jahrzehnten Katalogisierungspraxis erarbeiteten Standards sind erhaltenswert, und welche sind im Hinblick auf den Fortschritt der IT und ein mögliches Semantic Web vielleicht gar nicht mehr nötig oder müssen an die Gegebenheiten angepasst werden? Mit diesen und anderen Fragen beschäftigt sich die Aufsatzsammlung "Conversations with catalogers in the 21st century". In der Community bekannte Personen wie Martha Yee, Christine Schwartz oder James Weinheimer kommen zu Wort, aus dem deutschsprachigen Raum Bernhard Eversberg, Entwickler des Bibliothekssystems Allegro.

0.004280793 = product of:
  0.014982775 = sum of:
    0.006407136 = weight(_text_:information in 789) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.006407136 = score(doc=789,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.066068366 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037635546 = queryNorm
        0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 789, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=789)
    0.008575639 = product of:
      0.025726916 = sum of:
        0.025726916 = weight(_text_:29 in 789) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025726916 = score(doc=789,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13239008 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037635546 = queryNorm
            0.19432661 = fieldWeight in 789, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=789)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)

Abstract

Cataloging is at its most interesting when it is comprehended as part of a larger, meaningful, objective. Resource description is a complex task; but the essence of librarianship is curatorship of a collection, and that sense of curatorial responsibility is one of the things that makes resource description into cataloging-that is, professional responsibility is the difference between the task of transcription and the satisfaction of professional decisions well-made. Part of the essential difference is comprehension of the cultural milieu from which specific resources arise, and the modes of scholarship that might be used to nudge them to reveal their secrets for the advancement of knowledge. In this paper I describe a course designed to lend excitement and professional judgment to the education of future catalogers and collection managers by conveying the notion that all documents are, in fact, cultural artifacts. Part of a knowledge-sensitive curriculum for knowledge organization, the purpose of this course is to go beyond the concept of documents as mere packets of information to demonstrate that each is a product of its time and circumstances. Bibliographic skill leads to greater comfort with the intellectual and cultural forces that impel the creation of documents. Students become comfortable with the curatorial side of cataloging - the placement of each document in its cultural milieu as the goal of resource description, rather than the act of description itself.

Date

29. 9.2008 14:59:03

0.0034650816 = product of:
  0.02425557 = sum of:
    0.02425557 = product of:
      0.07276671 = sum of:
        0.07276671 = weight(_text_:29 in 3947) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07276671 = score(doc=3947,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.13239008 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037635546 = queryNorm
            0.5496386 = fieldWeight in 3947, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3947)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Date

29. 8.2005 11:30:41
29. 8.2005 13:23:12

0.0034302555 = product of:
  0.024011787 = sum of:
    0.024011787 = product of:
      0.07203536 = sum of:
        0.07203536 = weight(_text_:29 in 5622) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07203536 = score(doc=5622,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13239008 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037635546 = queryNorm
            0.5441145 = fieldWeight in 5622, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=5622)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Date

21. 4.2002 11:29:35

0.0029811265 = product of:
  0.010433942 = sum of:
    0.0044849957 = weight(_text_:information in 238) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.0044849957 = score(doc=238,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.066068366 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037635546 = queryNorm
        0.06788416 = fieldWeight in 238, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=238)
    0.005948947 = product of:
      0.01784684 = sum of:
        0.01784684 = weight(_text_:22 in 238) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01784684 = score(doc=238,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13179328 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037635546 = queryNorm
            0.1354154 = fieldWeight in 238, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=238)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)

Footnote

Rez. in ZfBB 51(2004) H.1, S.54-55 (G. Pflug): "Unter dem wachsenden Einfluss der Informationstechnologie auf den Bibliotheksbereich nimmt die Katalogisierung eine Schlüsselstellung ein. Das vorliegende Werk gliedert sich in zwei Teile. Der erste Abschnitt ist mit »National Libraries« überschrieben, befasst sich jedoch nur mit der Library of Congress und der National Library of Canada. Ihm folgen Artikel über »Libraries around the world«. Dabei fälltjedoch auf, dass diese Studien zwar Bibliotheken in Großbritannien, Australien, Mittel- und Südamerika und selbst Afrika (Botswana) behandeln, nicht jedoch aus Kontinentaleuropa, trotz entsprechender Aktivitäten etwa in den Niederlanden, in Frankreich oder den deutschsprachigen Ländern. Nur DOBIS/LIBIS wird erwähnt, aber nur, weil es für kurze Zeit die kanadische Entwicklung beeinflusst hat. Im zweiten Teil kommen Katalogisierungsfachleute aus vier Spezial- und neun akademischen Bibliotheken - ausschließlich aus Nordamerika und Großbritannien - zu Wort. So enthält das Werk in 22 Beispielen Berichte über individuelle und regionale Lösungen. Dabei steht die Frage im Vordergrund, zu welchen Änderungen in der Katalogisierungs- und Sacherschließungspraxis die neuen elektronischen Techniken geführt haben. So streben z.B. die englischen Hochschulbibliotheken ein koordiniertes System an. Mit dem Übergang der British Library zu MARC 21 wird das Katalogsystem in Großbritannien nachhaltig beeinflusst - um nur zwei nahe liegende Beispiele zu nennen. Insgesamt werden drei Aspekte behandelt, die Automatisierungstechnik; die dabei einzusetzende Kooperation und das Outsourcing - nicht nur durch Übernahme von Daten anderer Bibliotheken oder durch Verbundsysteme, vor allem der Library of Congress, sondern auch durch Buchhandelsfirmen wie Blackwell North America Authority Control Service. In der Frage der Sacherschließung befassen sich die Beiträge mit den im amerikanischen Bereich üblichen Klassifikationssystemen, vor allem der Colon Classification, Dewey in seinen beiden Formen oder der Library of Congress Classification. Für die deutsche Diskussion sind diese Aspekte vor allem wegen des Übergangs der Deutschen Bibliothek in ihrer Nationalbibliografie zur DDC von großem Interesse (vgl. Magda Heiner-Freiling: Die DDC in der Deutschen Nationalbibliografie. In Dialog mit Bibliotheken. 15. 2003, Nr. 3, S. 8-13). Doch stellen auch die unterschiedlichen Überlegungen zur alphabetischen Katalogisierung, verbunden mit den da zugehörigen Datenbanken, einen interessanten Beitrag zur augenblicklichen Diskussion in Deutschland dar, da auch hier seit einigen Jahren die Katalogisierung nach RAK und ihre Ablösung eine lebhafte Diskussion ausgelöst hat, wie unter anderem der zusammenfassende Beitrag von Elisabeth Niggemann in: Dialog mit Bibliotheken (15. 2003, Nr. 2, S. 4-8) zeigt. Auch die angloamerikanischen und die mit ihnen zum Beispiel in Mexiko, Südamerika oder Australien verbundenen Bibliotheken - das zeigt das Buch deutlich - diskutieren die Frage der alphabetischen Katalogisierung kontrovers. So werden z.B. neben den dominanten AACR-Regeln mit ihrer Weiterentwicklung mehr als zehn andere Katalogisierungssysteme und rund 20 Online-Datenbanken behandelt. Damit liefert das Buch für die Diskussion in Deutschland und die anstehenden Entscheidungen in seiner Grundtendenz wie in den unterschiedlichen-auch widersprüchlichen-Aspekten dereinzelnen Beiträge wertvolle Anregungen."

0.00291377 = product of:
  0.020396389 = sum of:
    0.020396389 = product of:
      0.061189163 = sum of:
        0.061189163 = weight(_text_:22 in 5352) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.061189163 = score(doc=5352,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13179328 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037635546 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 5352, 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=5352)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Date

8.10.2000 14:22:27

0.00291377 = product of:
  0.020396389 = sum of:
    0.020396389 = product of:
      0.061189163 = sum of:
        0.061189163 = weight(_text_:22 in 2622) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.061189163 = score(doc=2622,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13179328 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037635546 = queryNorm
            0.46428138 = fieldWeight in 2622, 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=2622)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Footnote

Rez. in: Technicalities 22(2002) no.1, S.19-20 (S.S. Intner)

0.002562855 = product of:
  0.017939983 = sum of:
    0.017939983 = weight(_text_:information in 1878) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.017939983 = score(doc=1878,freq=8.0), product of:
        0.066068366 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037635546 = queryNorm
        0.27153665 = fieldWeight in 1878, product of:
          2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
            8.0 = termFreq=8.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1878)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

The quality of large catalogs is uneven and often low, but this issue is underrated and understudied. Library catalogs often fail to communicate correct and clear information to users and their low quality is not simply due to faults, duplications, and so on but also to unwise cataloging standards and policies. While there is plenty of uncontrolled information about books and other publications, the need for good-quality bibliographic information is apparent and library catalogs may provide a trustworthy map of the publishing output, with full control of editions, works, authors, and so on and effective navigation functions, which are lacking in today's information-rich environment.

0.0022194972 = product of:
  0.015536481 = sum of:
    0.015536481 = weight(_text_:information in 3817) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.015536481 = score(doc=3817,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.066068366 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037635546 = queryNorm
        0.23515764 = fieldWeight in 3817, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3817)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

What kinds of mental models do library catalogue users have of the bibliographic universe in an age of online and electronic information? Using phenomenography and grounded analysis, it identifies participants' understanding, experience, and conceptualisation of the bibliographic universe, and identifies their expectations when using library catalogues. It contrasts participants' mental models with existing LIS models, and explores the nature of the bibliographic universe. The bibliographic universe can be considered to be a social object that exists because it is inscribed in catalogue records, cataloguing codes, bibliographies, and other bibliographic tools. It is a socially constituted phenomenon.

Content

A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at Monash University in 2017 Faculty of Information Technology. Vgl.: https://figshare.com/articles/Models_of_the_bibliographic_universe/5216347.

Imprint

Melbourne : Monash University; Faculty of Information Technology

0.001960146 = product of:
  0.013721022 = sum of:
    0.013721022 = product of:
      0.041163065 = sum of:
        0.041163065 = weight(_text_:29 in 5181) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.041163065 = score(doc=5181,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13239008 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037635546 = queryNorm
            0.31092256 = fieldWeight in 5181, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5181)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Source

Program. 33(1999) no.1, S.29-39

0.0018122118 = product of:
  0.012685482 = sum of:
    0.012685482 = weight(_text_:information in 174) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.012685482 = score(doc=174,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.066068366 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037635546 = queryNorm
        0.1920054 = fieldWeight in 174, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=174)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

0.0017151277 = product of:
  0.0120058935 = sum of:
    0.0120058935 = product of:
      0.03601768 = sum of:
        0.03601768 = weight(_text_:29 in 1924) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03601768 = score(doc=1924,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13239008 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037635546 = queryNorm
            0.27205724 = fieldWeight in 1924, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1924)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Date

29. 5.2015 10:48:25

0.0016996992 = product of:
  0.011897894 = sum of:
    0.011897894 = product of:
      0.03569368 = sum of:
        0.03569368 = weight(_text_:22 in 114) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03569368 = score(doc=114,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13179328 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037635546 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 114, 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=114)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Date

10. 9.2000 17:38:22

0.0015853554 = product of:
  0.011097487 = sum of:
    0.011097487 = weight(_text_:information in 2627) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.011097487 = score(doc=2627,freq=6.0), product of:
        0.066068366 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037635546 = queryNorm
        0.16796975 = fieldWeight in 2627, product of:
          2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
            6.0 = termFreq=6.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2627)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

This report constitutes Phase I of a two-part study; a Phase II report will discuss subject cataloging. Phase I is concerned with the materials of a library as individual records (or documents) and as representations of certain works by certain authors--that is, with descriptive, or bibliographic, cataloging. Discussed in the report are (1) the history, role, function, and oblectives .of the author-and-title catalog; (2) problems and principles of descriptive catalogng, including the use and function of "main entry, the principle of authorship, and the process and problems of cataloging print and nonprint materials; (3) organization of the catalog; and (4) potentialities of automation. The considerations inherent in bibliographic cataloging, such as the distinction between the "book" and the "work," are said to be so elemental that they are essential not only to the effective control of library's materials but also to that of the information contained in the materials. Because of the special concern with information, the author includes a discussion of the "Bibliographic Dimensions of Information Control," 'prepared in collaboration with Robert M. Hayes, which also appears in "American Documentation," VOl.201 July 1969, p. 247-252.

0.0014701096 = product of:
  0.010290766 = sum of:
    0.010290766 = product of:
      0.030872298 = sum of:
        0.030872298 = weight(_text_:29 in 5481) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.030872298 = score(doc=5481,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13239008 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037635546 = queryNorm
            0.23319192 = fieldWeight in 5481, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5481)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Date

29. 7.2006 19:35:37

0.0013452185 = product of:
  0.009416529 = sum of:
    0.009416529 = weight(_text_:information in 1271) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009416529 = score(doc=1271,freq=12.0), product of:
        0.066068366 = queryWeight, product of:
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037635546 = queryNorm
        0.14252704 = fieldWeight in 1271, product of:
          3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
            12.0 = termFreq=12.0
          1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0234375 = fieldNorm(doc=1271)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

The future of bibliographic control will be collaborative, decentralized, international in scope, and Web-based. Its realization will occur in cooperation with the private sector, and with the active collaboration of library users. Data will be gathered from multiple sources; change will happen quickly; and bibliographic control will be dynamic, not static. The underlying technology that makes this future possible and necessary-the World Wide Web-is now almost two decades old. Libraries must continue the transition to this future without delay in order to retain their relevance as information providers. The Working Group on the Future of Bibliographic Control encourages the library community to take a thoughtful and coordinated approach to effecting significant changes in bibliographic control. Such an approach will call for leadership that is neither unitary nor centralized. Nor will the responsibility to provide such leadership fall solely to the Library of Congress (LC). That said, the Working Group recognizes that LC plays a unique role in the library community of the United States, and the directions that LC takes have great impact on all libraries. We also recognize that there are many other institutions and organizations that have the expertise and the capacity to play significant roles in the bibliographic future. Wherever possible, those institutions must step forward and take responsibility for assisting with navigating the transition and for playing appropriate ongoing roles after that transition is complete. To achieve the goals set out in this document, we must look beyond individual libraries to a system wide deployment of resources. We must realize efficiencies in order to be able to reallocate resources from certain lower-value components of the bibliographic control ecosystem into other higher-value components of that same ecosystem. The recommendations in this report are directed at a number of parties, indicated either by their common initialism (e.g., "LC" for Library of Congress, "PCC" for Program for Cooperative Cataloging) or by their general category (e.g., "Publishers," "National Libraries"). When the recommendation is addressed to "All," it is intended for the library community as a whole and its close collaborators.
The Library of Congress must begin by prioritizing the recommendations that are directed in whole or in part at LC. Some define tasks that can be achieved immediately and with moderate effort; others will require analysis and planning that will have to be coordinated broadly and carefully. The Working Group has consciously not associated time frames with any of its recommendations. The recommendations fall into five general areas: 1. Increase the efficiency of bibliographic production for all libraries through increased cooperation and increased sharing of bibliographic records, and by maximizing the use of data produced throughout the entire "supply chain" for information resources. 2. Transfer effort into higher-value activity. In particular, expand the possibilities for knowledge creation by "exposing" rare and unique materials held by libraries that are currently hidden from view and, thus, underused. 3. Position our technology for the future by recognizing that the World Wide Web is both our technology platform and the appropriate platform for the delivery of our standards. Recognize that people are not the only users of the data we produce in the name of bibliographic control, but so too are machine applications that interact with those data in a variety of ways. 4. Position our community for the future by facilitating the incorporation of evaluative and other user-supplied information into our resource descriptions. Work to realize the potential of the FRBR framework for revealing and capitalizing on the various relationships that exist among information resources. 5. Strengthen the library profession through education and the development of metrics that will inform decision-making now and in the future. The Working Group intends what follows to serve as a broad blueprint for the Library of Congress and its colleagues in the library and information technology communities for extending and promoting access to information resources.