Search (217 results, page 1 of 11)

0.043379623 = product of:
  0.15182868 = sum of:
    0.1341085 = weight(_text_:interpretation in 2425) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.1341085 = score(doc=2425,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.21405315 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.6265196 = fieldWeight in 2425, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2425)
    0.017720178 = product of:
      0.035440356 = sum of:
        0.035440356 = weight(_text_:22 in 2425) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.035440356 = score(doc=2425,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.13085791 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037368443 = queryNorm
            0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 2425, 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=2425)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.2857143 = coord(2/7)

Abstract

The FRBR model is by many considered to be an important contribution to the next generation of bibliographic catalogues, but a major challenge for the library community is how to use this model on already existing MARC-based bibliographic catalogues. This problem requires a solution for the interpretation and conversion of MARC records, and a tool for this kind of conversion is developed as a part of the Norwegian BIBSYS FRBR project. The tool is based on a systematic approach to the interpretation and conversion process and is designed to be adaptable to the rules applied in different catalogues.

Source

Research and advanced technology for digital libraries : 10th European conference, proceedings / ECDL 2006, Alicante, Spain, September 17 - 22, 2006

0.021895267 = product of:
  0.15326686 = sum of:
    0.15326686 = weight(_text_:interpretation in 223) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.15326686 = score(doc=223,freq=4.0), product of:
        0.21405315 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.71602243 = fieldWeight in 223, product of:
          2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
            4.0 = termFreq=4.0
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=223)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

In 1994, the Library of Congress issued a rule interpretation to AACR2 detailing how uniform titles for choreographic works should be established. The value of the rule interpretation is discussed, and it is contrasted with prior practices. The origins of the concept behind the rule are traced back to the New York Public Library in the mid twentieth century, and its evolution into the current guidelines is delineated.

0.019352864 = product of:
  0.13547005 = sum of:
    0.13547005 = weight(_text_:interpretation in 5187) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.13547005 = score(doc=5187,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21405315 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.6328804 = fieldWeight in 5187, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5187)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

This article provides an interpretation of the structure of classification theory literature, from the late 19th Century to the present, by dividing it into four orders, and then describes the relationship between that and manuals for classification design.

0.016846253 = product of:
  0.11792377 = sum of:
    0.11792377 = sum of:
      0.0774205 = weight(_text_:anwendung in 2562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.0774205 = score(doc=2562,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1809185 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.8414783 = idf(docFreq=948, maxDocs=44218)
            0.037368443 = queryNorm
          0.42793027 = fieldWeight in 2562, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            4.8414783 = idf(docFreq=948, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2562)
      0.040503263 = weight(_text_:22 in 2562) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.040503263 = score(doc=2562,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.13085791 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.037368443 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 2562, 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=2562)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

Die Bildung von Trigrammen wird in der automatisierten Dublettenerkennung häufig in Situationen angewandt, in denen "sehr ähnliche" aber nicht idente Datensätze als Duplikate identifiziert werden sollen. In dieser Arbeit werden drei auf Trigrammen beruhende Erkennungsverfahren (das Jaccard-Maß, der euklidische Abstand sowie der Ähnlichkeitswert des KOBV) praktisch angewandt, sämtliche dabei notwendigen Schritte umgesetzt und schließlich der Verbrauch an Zeit und Ressourcen (=die "Performanz") gemessen. Die hier zur Anwendung gelangte Datenmenge umfasst 392.616 bibliographische Titeldatensätze, die im Österreichischen Bibliothekenverbund erbracht wurden.

Date

21. 6.2010 19:30:22

0.0154822925 = product of:
  0.10837604 = sum of:
    0.10837604 = weight(_text_:interpretation in 3692) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10837604 = score(doc=3692,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21405315 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.5063043 = fieldWeight in 3692, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3692)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

In the quest for cataloguing simplification a logical place to start is with areas that present complicated decision points for cataloguers. A potentially confusing interpretative task is the application of Library of Congress rule interpretation (LRCI) 25.10 dealing with the determination of an 'adequate' title. The authors propose the elimination of this rule, and instead call for a simple application of the concept of the differentiating uniform title, if applicable, thereby increasing access points and cataloguing speed, 2 key objectives of cataloguing simplification

0.0154822925 = product of:
  0.10837604 = sum of:
    0.10837604 = weight(_text_:interpretation in 6568) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10837604 = score(doc=6568,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21405315 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.5063043 = fieldWeight in 6568, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=6568)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

Discusses the advantages of treating computer files as serials for cataloguing purposes, and outlines methodologies for doing so. Examines general concerns in this area and addresses issues pertaining to both direct and remote access to the materials. Suggests tools and recources which can assist both cataloguers and non cataloguers in the interpretation of serial computer file records

0.0154822925 = product of:
  0.10837604 = sum of:
    0.10837604 = weight(_text_:interpretation in 1955) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.10837604 = score(doc=1955,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21405315 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.5063043 = fieldWeight in 1955, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=1955)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

FRBR, FRAD, and FRSAD models propose user tasks as a way to address and categorize functions that a catalog should support. The user tasks are not harmonized among these models, but to do that, they should first be fully understood and analyzed, especially "select" and "identify." We decided to look at the FRBR user tasks from the perspective of interactive information retrieval (IIR). Several IIR models were reviewed and Ellis' and Belkin's models were chosen for further analysis and interpretation of FRBR "select" and "identify" tasks.

0.013547006 = product of:
  0.09482904 = sum of:
    0.09482904 = weight(_text_:interpretation in 1585) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09482904 = score(doc=1585,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21405315 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.4430163 = fieldWeight in 1585, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1585)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

Highlights the striking parallels between S.R. Ranganathan' Classified Catalogue Rules (CCC) and the AACR2. Analyses the following concepts of the Canons of Cataloguing in CCC: ascertainability, prepotency, individualization, currency, consistency, laws of interpretation, principle of local variation, principle of osmosis, centralied cataloguing and printing of cards, and prenatal cataloguing. Studies the canon of individualization and its application to the names of persons, corporate bodies and conferences, georgraphic names, uniform titles, monographic series and serials. Analyses the concepts of classis, isolates, types of reference, book index entry, multi volumed book, union catalogue, national bibliography, indexing, tracing, and new kind of documents

0.013547006 = product of:
  0.09482904 = sum of:
    0.09482904 = weight(_text_:interpretation in 5620) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09482904 = score(doc=5620,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21405315 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.4430163 = fieldWeight in 5620, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5620)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Content

The author addresses issues regarding the cataloging of digital manifestations of works. The problem of how to catalog digitized rare books and electronic texts to facilitate access to works while distinguishing editions is discussed. Using digital versions of Blake's Book of Urizen, The Kelmscott Chaucer and Robinson Crusoe as examples, the article focuses on the way current cataloging aids or hinders access to works. Specific problems include: the non-uniform use of uniform titles; varying application of the Library of Congress Rule Interpretation (1.11A) concerning electronic reproductions; the lack of analysis at the work level in digital projects.

0.013547006 = product of:
  0.09482904 = sum of:
    0.09482904 = weight(_text_:interpretation in 279) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09482904 = score(doc=279,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21405315 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.4430163 = fieldWeight in 279, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=279)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

0.013547006 = product of:
  0.09482904 = sum of:
    0.09482904 = weight(_text_:interpretation in 481) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09482904 = score(doc=481,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21405315 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.4430163 = fieldWeight in 481, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=481)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

The motivation of decreasing cataloging costs by minimizing the role of the professional librarian in the cataloging process ha led to experiments in the application of expert systems to cataloging. Systems have been developed to accomplish specific elements of the cataloging process through human-machine interface or through automatic reading and interpretation of title pages. All of the systems developed thus far require a human cataloger to participate in, monitor, and/or complete the cataloging process. Furthermore, the expert systems developed for descriptive cataloging are based on the logic and rules of AACR2 and its dependence on title page information, neither of which may be relevant in their current form as cataloging comes to terms with electronic publishing and full-text retrieval of information.

0.013547006 = product of:
  0.09482904 = sum of:
    0.09482904 = weight(_text_:interpretation in 1916) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.09482904 = score(doc=1916,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21405315 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.4430163 = fieldWeight in 1916, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1916)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

In FRBR and FRAD, realization of a musical work through performance is unambiguously included as a type of expression when it involves music in the Western canon. There is room for interpretation, however, as to whether an improvisation in jazz or rock constitutes an expression, or a new work with each performance. Multiple expressions, particularly transcriptions, and related works suggest the potential usefulness of treating a jazz performance as a work. This article examines the question of boundaries between one work and another, and illustrates ways that the FRBR model might be applied to cataloging improvisations.

0.01161172 = product of:
  0.081282035 = sum of:
    0.081282035 = weight(_text_:interpretation in 5337) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.081282035 = score(doc=5337,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21405315 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.37972826 = fieldWeight in 5337, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5337)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

Cartographic materials in digital format are now a reality in modern map libraries. Libraries have been reluctant to catalogue this type of material because of the lack of cataloguing rules and the highly technical nature of the information. This paper provides a status report on cataloguing rules for electronic cartographic materials, with particular emphasis on the new fields that have been created in USMARC to accommodate the special requirements for this material. For each part of the bibliographic description, both what current cataloguing rules allow and what is being recommended as part of the revision to Cartographic Materials: A Manual of Interpretation for AACR2 is presented. The paper also looks at what is required to get started and identifies resource tools.

0.01161172 = product of:
  0.081282035 = sum of:
    0.081282035 = weight(_text_:interpretation in 5851) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.081282035 = score(doc=5851,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21405315 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.37972826 = fieldWeight in 5851, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5851)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

This paper discusses how the AustLit: Australian Literature Gateway's interpretation, enhancement and implementation of the International Federation of Library Association's Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR Final Report 1998) model is meeting the needs of Australian literature scholars for accurate bibliographic representation of the histories of literary texts. It also explores how the AustLit Gateway's underpinning research principles, which are based on the tradition of scholarly enumerative and descriptive bibliography, with enhancements from analytical bibliography and literary biography, have impacted upon our implementation of the FRBR model. The major enhancement or alteration to the model is the use of enhanced manifestations, which allow the full representation of all agents' contributions to be shown in a highly granular format by enabling creation events to be incorporated at all levels of the Work, Expression and Manifestation nexus.

0.01161172 = product of:
  0.081282035 = sum of:
    0.081282035 = weight(_text_:interpretation in 5853) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.081282035 = score(doc=5853,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21405315 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.37972826 = fieldWeight in 5853, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5853)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

In this paper, the FRBR model is approached through Umberto Eco's semiotic analysis of the translation notion as developed in his Dire quasi la stessa cosa: esperienze di traduzione. Eco's taxonomy of forms of interpretation is used as a basis for a tentative abstract definition of what constitutes a mere expression of a given musical work and what constitutes a new, distinct musical work. The issues of aggregates of musical works, fragments of musical works, and works of vocal music, are also addressed. FRBR can be used as a basis for a model for the complex processes involved in the production and reception of musical works. And FRBR highlights complex bibliographic relationships that put musical works at the very center of myriads of interrelated systems that make up the catalog, which is viewed as a set of circular objects such as atoms or solar systems rather than as a straight linear listing.

0.009677563 = product of:
  0.06774294 = sum of:
    0.06774294 = product of:
      0.13548587 = sum of:
        0.13548587 = weight(_text_:anwendung in 5961) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.13548587 = score(doc=5961,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1809185 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.8414783 = idf(docFreq=948, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037368443 = queryNorm
            0.74887794 = fieldWeight in 5961, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.8414783 = idf(docFreq=948, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=5961)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

0.009676432 = product of:
  0.067735024 = sum of:
    0.067735024 = weight(_text_:interpretation in 3871) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.067735024 = score(doc=3871,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.21405315 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.037368443 = queryNorm
        0.3164402 = fieldWeight in 3871, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.7281795 = idf(docFreq=390, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3871)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Abstract

This study presents preliminary themes surfaced from an ongoing ethnographic study. The research question is: how and where do cultures influence the cataloging practices of using U.S. standards to catalog Chinese materials? The author applies warrant as a lens for evaluating knowledge representation systems, and extends the application from examining classificatory decisions to cataloging decisions. Semantic warrant as a conceptual tool allows us to recognize and name the various rationales behind cataloging decisions, grants us explanatory power, and the language to "visualize" and reflect on the conflicting priorities in cataloging practices. Through participatory observation, the author recorded the cataloging practices of two Chinese catalogers working on the same cataloging project. One of the catalogers is U.S. trained, and another cataloger is a professor of Library and Information Science from China, who is also a subject expert and a cataloger of Chinese special collections. The study shows how the catalogers describe Chinese special collections using many U.S. cataloging and classification standards but from different approaches. The author presents particular cases derived from the fieldwork, with an emphasis on the many layers presented by cultures, principles, standards, and practices of different scope, each of which may represent conflicting warrants. From this, it is made clear that the conflicts of warrants influence cataloging practice. We may view the conflicting warrants as an interpretation of the tension between different semantic warrants and the globalization and localization of cataloging standards.

0.008543595 = product of:
  0.059805162 = sum of:
    0.059805162 = sum of:
      0.04190508 = weight(_text_:anwendung in 632) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04190508 = score(doc=632,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.1809185 = queryWeight, product of:
            4.8414783 = idf(docFreq=948, maxDocs=44218)
            0.037368443 = queryNorm
          0.23162407 = fieldWeight in 632, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            4.8414783 = idf(docFreq=948, maxDocs=44218)
            0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=632)
      0.017900083 = weight(_text_:22 in 632) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.017900083 = score(doc=632,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.13085791 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.037368443 = queryNorm
          0.13679022 = fieldWeight in 632, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=632)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

Content

"Zusammenarbeit der Verbundsysteme, Verbesserung von Datentausch und Fremddatennutzung Matchkey Bei der Verwendung von Meta-Suchmaschinen zur parallelen Recherche in bibliografischen Datenbanken kommt es häufig vor, dass derselbe Titel mehrmals in der Trefferliste auftaucht. In dieser Situation könnte ein so genannter Matchkey Abhilfe schaffen, der jeden Datensatz aus den vorhandenen bibliografischen Daten heraus eindeutig identifiziert. Ein solcher Algorithmus geht von einem bibliografischen Datensatz aus und generiert einen Schlüssel (Matchkey), der wiederum in den Datensatz integriert werden kann. Der Schlüssel muss sortierfähig sein, so dass die Trefferliste nach dem Grad der Ähnlichkeit sortiert werden kann. Eine wichtige Voraussetzung für die erfolgreiche Anwendung des Matchkey ist die Beseitigung der Hausregeln in den Verbünden und Bibliotheken. Bisher hat Die Deutsche Bibliothek das Thema analysiert und strebt nun die Formulierung und Bereitstellung eines ersten Algorithmus an, um eine Implementierung zu Testzwecken voraussichtlich im März/April 2006 zu ermöglichen. Ein klares Ergebnis soll bis Ende 2006 vorliegen.
MARC21 als Austauschformat Die Expertengruppe Datenformate hat in ihrer 5. Sitzung am 22. November 2005 die Frage der Hierarchienabbildung bei der Übernahme von MARC 21 weiter diskutiert und einer Lösung zugeführt. Für einen geringen Prozentsatz der Daten werden trotz Vorarbeiten der Expertengruppe Probleme bei der Überführung von MARC-21-Daten in MAB2-Strukturen gesehen. Es wurde darauf hingewiesen, dass es im Zusammenhang mit dem Umstieg auf MARC 21 ebenso wie bei der kooperativen Katalogisierung notwendig ist, gemeinsame Regeln festzulegen und Absprachen zwischen den Verbünden zu treffen. Eine unterschiedliche Handhabung des Formats sollte sich von vornherein verbieten. Projekt Kooperative Neukatalogisierung Die Projektgruppe hat zweimal getagt, zuletzt am 3. November 2005. Es liegen erste Ergebnisse vor, und spätestens Anfang Januar 2006 soll das Verfahren erprobt werden. Alle Verbünde signalisieren ihr Interesse an dem geplanten Verfahren, da die Eigenkatalogisierungsrate nach wie vor zu hoch ist. Für die Akzeptanz des Dienstes, der auch zum Synchronisieren der vorhandenen Aufnahmen und zum Austausch von Sacherschließungsdaten genutzt werden soll, ist die Aktualität des geplanten Neukatalogisierungspools essentiell. Ein weiteres Ziel ist auch die Optimierung der Arbeitsabläufe zwischen Verbundzentrale und Bibliotheken. Catalogue Enrichment Zur Anreicherung der Katalogdaten gibt es verschiedene Aktivitäten innerhalb der Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Verbundsysteme, die koordiniert werden müssen, damit eine Mehrfachdigitalisierung von Inhaltsverzeichnissen, Abstracts und anderen Objekten vermieden werden kann. Die Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Verbundsysteme beschließt, eine kleine Arbeitsgruppe einzusetzen, die bis spätestens Anfang Februar 2006 einen Vorschlag mit unterschiedlichen Szenarien für unterschiedliche Umgebungen vorlegen soll. Aufgabe der AG Datenanreicherung ist die Konzeption eines schnellen Dienstes für die Digitalisierung von Abstracts und Inhaltsverzeichnissen sofern sie lizenzrechtlich frei verfügbar sind, die allen Verbünden zur Verfügung gestellt werden sollen. Dazu gehören eine Übersicht über die vorhandenen Daten und eine ausgearbeitete Verfahrensvorschrift für das künftige Vorgehen.
DDC/Melvil-Nutzungs- und Lizenzsituation Die Deutsche Bibliothek hat den Dienst Melvil vorgestellt, der auf der im Rahmen des Projektes DDC Deutsch erstellten deutschen Übersetzung der 22. Ausgabe der DDC basiert, und die Such- und Sprachgewohnheiten deutschsprachiger Benutzerinnen und Benutzer berücksichtigt. Mit Melvil wurde ein Online-Dienst entwickelt, der Bibliotheken und Informationseinrichtungen außer einem an WebDewey orientierten Klassifikationstool MelvilClass auch ein Retrievaltool MelvilSearch für die verbale Suche nach DDC-erschlossenen Dokumenten und das Browsing in der DDC-Hierarchie zur Verfügung stellt. Über die Schnittstelle MelvilSoap können Bibliotheken und Verbundzentralen, die den Dienst Melvil lizenziert haben, auch DDC-Daten zur weiteren Nutzung herunterladen. Gegenwärtig vergibt Die Deutsche Bibliothek Testlizenzen, ab 2006 kann der Dienst nach einem gestaffelten Modell kostenpflichtig genutzt werden Ergebnisse der Adhoc-Arbeitsgruppe ISBD(CR) Der Standardisierungsausschuss hatte in seiner 9. Sitzung am 15. Dezember 2004 die Anpassung der Splitregeln bei fortlaufenden Sammelwerken an die ISBD(CR) mit dem Ziel der Übernahme beschlossen. Im Januar 2005 richtete die Arbeitsstelle für Standardisierung eine Ad-hoc-AG ISBD(CR) ein, in der Vertreter der ZDB, der Expertengruppe Formalerschließung und der AGDBT (Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Datenbankteilnehmer der ZDB) unter der Federführung der Arbeitsstelle für Standardisierung zusammenarbeiteten. Auftragsgemäß konnte dem Standardisierungsausschuss am 2. August 2005 ein entscheidungsreifer Entwurf zur Anwendung der ISBD(CR)-Splitregeln für fortlaufende Sammelwerke vorgelegt werden. Die Unterlage, die dem Standardisierungsausschuss zu seiner 11. Sitzung am 1. Dezember 2005 zugeleitet wurde, wurde den Mitgliedern der Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Verbundsysteme im Vorfeld der Sitzung zur Kenntnis gegeben. Die zeitnahe Anwendung der ISBD(CR)-Splitregeln würde nicht nur in einem kleinen abgeschlossenen Bereich eine Angleichung an internationale Gepflogenheiten bedeuten, sondern sie hätte auch einige positive Auswirkungen auf die von Zeitschriftentiteln abhängigen ergänzenden Dienstleistungen. So würde z.B. die Verlinkung mit SFX-Diensten erheblich erleichtert."

0.008295055 = product of:
  0.058065377 = sum of:
    0.058065377 = product of:
      0.116130754 = sum of:
        0.116130754 = weight(_text_:anwendung in 5972) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.116130754 = score(doc=5972,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1809185 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.8414783 = idf(docFreq=948, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037368443 = queryNorm
            0.6418954 = fieldWeight in 5972, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.8414783 = idf(docFreq=948, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=5972)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)

0.008295055 = product of:
  0.058065377 = sum of:
    0.058065377 = product of:
      0.116130754 = sum of:
        0.116130754 = weight(_text_:anwendung in 5672) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.116130754 = score(doc=5672,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1809185 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.8414783 = idf(docFreq=948, maxDocs=44218)
              0.037368443 = queryNorm
            0.6418954 = fieldWeight in 5672, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.8414783 = idf(docFreq=948, maxDocs=44218)
              0.09375 = fieldNorm(doc=5672)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.14285715 = coord(1/7)