Search (100 results, page 1 of 5)

0.040236898 = product of:
  0.080473796 = sum of:
    0.069319956 = weight(_text_:management in 4748) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.069319956 = score(doc=4748,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.13874207 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041162275 = queryNorm
        0.49963182 = fieldWeight in 4748, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=4748)
    0.0111538395 = product of:
      0.03346152 = sum of:
        0.03346152 = weight(_text_:22 in 4748) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03346152 = score(doc=4748,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14414327 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041162275 = queryNorm
            0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 4748, 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=4748)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Metadata and information technology staff in libraries that are building digital collections typically extract and manipulate MARC metadata sets to provide access to digital content via non-MARC schemes. Metadata processing in these libraries involves defining the relationships between metadata schemes, moving metadata between schemes, and coordinating the intellectual activity and physical resources required to create and manipulate metadata. Actively managing the non-MARC metadata resources used to build digital collections is something most of these libraries have only begun to do. This article proposes strategies for managing MARC metadata repurposing efforts as the first step in a coordinated approach to library metadata management. Guided by lessons learned from Cornell University library mapping and transformation activities, the authors apply the literature of data resource management to library metadata management and propose a model for managing MARC metadata repurposing processes through the implementation of a metadata management design.

Source

Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2, S.144-152

0.024649281 = product of:
  0.049298562 = sum of:
    0.03616763 = weight(_text_:management in 888) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03616763 = score(doc=888,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13874207 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041162275 = queryNorm
        0.2606825 = fieldWeight in 888, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=888)
    0.013130935 = product of:
      0.039392803 = sum of:
        0.039392803 = weight(_text_:29 in 888) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039392803 = score(doc=888,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14479601 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041162275 = queryNorm
            0.27205724 = fieldWeight in 888, 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=888)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Since Sep 1996 a group with representatives from the French National Library (BNF), French Joint Catalogue (CCF), Directorate of Scientific and Technical Information (DISTNB), Directorate of Reading (DL) and the Higher Education Bibliography Agency (ABES) has been working on establishing a format for exchanging local data which will accomodtae the needs of all users; conform to international standards and take account of new technological tools (Z39.50-1995). Using pre-existing formats with UNIMARC as the basis, the new format will allow selection of documents by different location criteria, establish conditions of communication and manage interlibrary loan. To date fields have been defined for data on location and management of copies, and for descriptive data on copies

Date

29. 1.1996 16:50:24

0.024649281 = product of:
  0.049298562 = sum of:
    0.03616763 = weight(_text_:management in 892) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03616763 = score(doc=892,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13874207 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041162275 = queryNorm
        0.2606825 = fieldWeight in 892, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=892)
    0.013130935 = product of:
      0.039392803 = sum of:
        0.039392803 = weight(_text_:29 in 892) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039392803 = score(doc=892,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14479601 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041162275 = queryNorm
            0.27205724 = fieldWeight in 892, 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=892)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

Abstract

Secondary information, e.g. MARC based bibliographic records, comprises structured data for identifying, tagging, retrieving and management of primary documents. SGML, the standard format for coding content and structure of primary documents, was introduced in 1986 as a publishing tool but is now being applied to bibliographic records. SGML now comprises standard definitions (DTD) for books, serials, articles and mathematical formulae. A simplified version (HTML) is used for Web pages. Pilot projects to develop SGML as a standard for bibliographic exchange include the Dublin Core, listing 13 descriptive elements for Internet documents; the French GRISELI programme using SGML for exchanging grey literature and US experiments on reformatting USMARC for use with SGML-based records

Date

29. 1.1996 16:50:24

0.02459022 = product of:
  0.04918044 = sum of:
    0.03616763 = weight(_text_:management in 2862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03616763 = score(doc=2862,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13874207 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041162275 = queryNorm
        0.2606825 = fieldWeight in 2862, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2862)
    0.013012813 = product of:
      0.03903844 = sum of:
        0.03903844 = weight(_text_:22 in 2862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03903844 = score(doc=2862,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14414327 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041162275 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2862, 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=2862)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(2/4)

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. The only way to get bibliographic records on to campus on-line library catalogues, and slide records on the national bibliographic utilities, is through the use of MARC. Discusses the importance of having individual slide and photograph records on the national bibliographic utilities, and considers the obstacles which currently make this difficult. Discusses mapping to MARC from data base management systems.

Date

4.12.1995 22:51:36

0.020667218 = product of:
  0.08266887 = sum of:
    0.08266887 = weight(_text_:management in 2) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.08266887 = score(doc=2,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13874207 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041162275 = queryNorm
        0.5958457 = fieldWeight in 2, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Microcomputers for information management. 6(1989), S.197-205

0.018674105 = product of:
  0.07469642 = sum of:
    0.07469642 = product of:
      0.11204463 = sum of:
        0.05627544 = weight(_text_:29 in 5228) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05627544 = score(doc=5228,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14479601 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041162275 = queryNorm
            0.38865322 = fieldWeight in 5228, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5228)
        0.055769198 = weight(_text_:22 in 5228) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.055769198 = score(doc=5228,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14414327 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041162275 = 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)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

29. 9.1996 18:58:22

0.018083815 = product of:
  0.07233526 = sum of:
    0.07233526 = weight(_text_:management in 4200) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07233526 = score(doc=4200,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13874207 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041162275 = queryNorm
        0.521365 = fieldWeight in 4200, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4200)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.014939285 = product of:
  0.05975714 = sum of:
    0.05975714 = product of:
      0.08963571 = sum of:
        0.04502035 = weight(_text_:29 in 2830) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04502035 = score(doc=2830,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14479601 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041162275 = queryNorm
            0.31092256 = fieldWeight in 2830, 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=2830)
        0.044615358 = weight(_text_:22 in 2830) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.044615358 = score(doc=2830,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14414327 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041162275 = queryNorm
            0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2830, 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=2830)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

9.12.2005 19:29:32

Source

Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.1, S.18-27

0.014939285 = product of:
  0.05975714 = sum of:
    0.05975714 = product of:
      0.08963571 = sum of:
        0.04502035 = weight(_text_:29 in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.04502035 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14479601 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041162275 = queryNorm
            0.31092256 = fieldWeight in 562, 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=562)
        0.044615358 = weight(_text_:22 in 562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.044615358 = score(doc=562,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.14414327 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041162275 = 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)
      0.6666667 = coord(2/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

9.12.2005 19:21:29

Source

Library hi tech. 22(2004) no.2, S.166-174

0.012917011 = product of:
  0.051668044 = sum of:
    0.051668044 = weight(_text_:management in 4960) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.051668044 = score(doc=4960,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13874207 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041162275 = queryNorm
        0.37240356 = fieldWeight in 4960, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4960)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Content

Vgl. als Verbindung zu Content-Management-Systemen: Contentmanager.de

0.012917011 = product of:
  0.051668044 = sum of:
    0.051668044 = weight(_text_:management in 941) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.051668044 = score(doc=941,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13874207 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041162275 = queryNorm
        0.37240356 = fieldWeight in 941, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=941)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Footnote

Übers. des Titels: Adaptation of standards and formats to the computerized management of bibliographic records

0.010960448 = product of:
  0.04384179 = sum of:
    0.04384179 = weight(_text_:management in 1323) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.04384179 = score(doc=1323,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.13874207 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041162275 = queryNorm
        0.31599492 = fieldWeight in 1323, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1323)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Maintaining a library of digital objects of necessaryy requires maintaining metadata about those objects. The metadata necessary for successful management and use of digital objeets is both more extensive than and different from the metadata used for managing collections of printed works and other physical materials. While a library may record descriptive metadata regarding a book in its collection, the book will not dissolve into a series of unconnected pages if the library fails to record structural metadata regarding the book's organization, nor will scholars be unable to evaluate the book's worth if the library fails to note that the book was produced using a Ryobi offset press. The Same cannot be said for a digital version of the saure book. Without structural metadata, the page image or text files comprising the digital work are of little use, and without technical metadata regarding the digitization process, scholars may be unsure of how accurate a reflection of the original the digital version provides. For internal management purposes, a library must have access to appropriate technical metadata in order to periodically refresh and migrate the data, ensuring the durability of valuable resources.

0.010333609 = product of:
  0.041334435 = sum of:
    0.041334435 = weight(_text_:management in 7797) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.041334435 = score(doc=7797,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13874207 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041162275 = queryNorm
        0.29792285 = fieldWeight in 7797, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=7797)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Despite the extensive use of automation for archive management the creation of ISAD(G) (General International Standard Archival Description) was only accepted in January 1992. A special adaptation of the ISBD had already enabled a start to be made on creating MARC format records for archive collections. ISAD(G) will facilitate the exchange of data among collections. Whether the new standard will be suitable for all forms of archive depends on the willingness of archivists to adopt new technology

0.010333609 = product of:
  0.041334435 = sum of:
    0.041334435 = weight(_text_:management in 4351) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.041334435 = score(doc=4351,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13874207 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041162275 = queryNorm
        0.29792285 = fieldWeight in 4351, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4351)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Source

Technical services management: 1965-1990. A quarter of a century of change and a look into the future. Festschrift for Kathryn Luther Henderson. Ed.: L.C. Smith et al

0.010333609 = product of:
  0.041334435 = sum of:
    0.041334435 = weight(_text_:management in 4608) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.041334435 = score(doc=4608,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13874207 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041162275 = queryNorm
        0.29792285 = fieldWeight in 4608, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=4608)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Diplomarbeit at the University of Saarbrücken which contains the following topics: data exchange format; terminology management systems; terminological databases; terminological record; data elements; data categories; data fields, etc.: hard- and software-related difficulties for the structure of records; description of approaches for the development of an exchange format for terminological data (MATER, MicroMATER, NTRF, SGML); considerations concerning an SGML-like exchange format; perspectives

0.009041907 = product of:
  0.03616763 = sum of:
    0.03616763 = weight(_text_:management in 2627) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03616763 = score(doc=2627,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13874207 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041162275 = queryNorm
        0.2606825 = fieldWeight in 2627, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2627)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

Provides a background to the development of the MINISIS relational database management system. The new MINISIS will offer a forms-based 4GL application development environment for building an integrated library system at the heart of which will be the catalogue database. Describes the research on the the database structure involving a comparison between USMARC and UNIMARC. Covers the worldwide use of the 2 systems. Discusses differences in field/subfield content designation; differences in field attributes; access points; linking entries, related fields; control information numbers and codes; USMARC format integration and linkage to other languages and holdings information; linkage with other MARC files; and considerations regarding systems design

0.009041907 = product of:
  0.03616763 = sum of:
    0.03616763 = weight(_text_:management in 4292) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03616763 = score(doc=4292,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13874207 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041162275 = queryNorm
        0.2606825 = fieldWeight in 4292, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=4292)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

0.009041907 = product of:
  0.03616763 = sum of:
    0.03616763 = weight(_text_:management in 1392) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.03616763 = score(doc=1392,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13874207 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041162275 = queryNorm
        0.2606825 = fieldWeight in 1392, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1392)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Abstract

SGML und XML sind fundamentale Konzepte der heutigen und künftigen Speicherung, Verarbeitung und Verbreitung langlebiger Informationen, gerade im Hinblick auf die weltweite Vernetzung durch das Internet. Ausgehend von den technischen und ökonomischen Herausforderungen unserer Informationsgesellschaft, stellen die Autoren die wichtigen Entwicklungen dar und berichten über aktuelle Projekte mit SGML- und XML-Anwendungen in der Praxis. Das Buch wendet sich an das Management informationsverarbeitender und -produzierender Unternehmen, an die Technik-Verantwortlichen und SGML-/XML-Anwender sowie an Studierende informationsverarbeitender Fächer und der Informatik.

0.007886956 = product of:
  0.031547826 = sum of:
    0.031547826 = product of:
      0.09464347 = sum of:
        0.09464347 = weight(_text_:22 in 5743) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.09464347 = score(doc=5743,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.14414327 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041162275 = 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)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Date

30. 3.2002 19:45:22

Source

Revista Española de Documentaçion Cientifica. 22(1999) no.2, S.198-219

0.0077502066 = product of:
  0.031000827 = sum of:
    0.031000827 = weight(_text_:management in 3967) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.031000827 = score(doc=3967,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.13874207 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.041162275 = queryNorm
        0.22344214 = fieldWeight in 3967, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.3706124 = idf(docFreq=4130, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3967)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Content

Vortrag im Rahmen der Session 93. Cataloguing der WORLD LIBRARY AND INFORMATION CONGRESS: 76TH IFLA GENERAL CONFERENCE AND ASSEMBLY, 10-15 August 2010, Gothenburg, Sweden - 149. Information Technology, Cataloguing, Classification and Indexing with Knowledge Management