Search (71 results, page 1 of 4)

  • × language_ss:"e"
  • × theme_ss:"Normdateien"
  1. Kaiser, M.; Lieder, H.J.; Majcen, K.; Vallant, H.: New ways of sharing and using authority information : the LEAF project (2003) 0.02
    0.021128101 = product of:
      0.059158683 = sum of:
        0.016068742 = weight(_text_:wide in 1166) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016068742 = score(doc=1166,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1312982 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.122383565 = fieldWeight in 1166, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1166)
        0.017435152 = weight(_text_:web in 1166) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017435152 = score(doc=1166,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 1166, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1166)
        0.013796352 = weight(_text_:bibliothek in 1166) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.013796352 = score(doc=1166,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.121660605 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1055303 = idf(docFreq=1980, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.113400325 = fieldWeight in 1166, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.1055303 = idf(docFreq=1980, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1166)
        0.004368951 = weight(_text_:information in 1166) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.004368951 = score(doc=1166,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.083984874 = fieldWeight in 1166, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1166)
        0.007489487 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1166) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.007489487 = score(doc=1166,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.08355226 = fieldWeight in 1166, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=1166)
      0.35714287 = coord(5/14)
    
    Abstract
    This article presents an overview of the LEAF project (Linking and Exploring Authority Files)1, which has set out to provide a framework for international, collaborative work in the sector of authority data with respect to authority control. Elaborating the virtues of authority control in today's Web environment is an almost futile exercise, since so much has been said and written about it in the last few years.2 The World Wide Web is generally understood to be poorly structured-both with regard to content and to locating required information. Highly structured databases might be viewed as small islands of precision within this chaotic environment. Though the Web in general or any particular structured database would greatly benefit from increased authority control, it should be noted that our following considerations only refer to authority control with regard to databases of "memory institutions" (i.e., libraries, archives, and museums). Moreover, when talking about authority records, we exclusively refer to personal name authority records that describe a specific person. Although different types of authority records could indeed be used in similar ways to the ones presented in this article, discussing those different types is outside the scope of both the LEAF project and this article. Personal name authority records-as are all other "authorities"-are maintained as separate records and linked to various kinds of descriptive records. Name authority records are usually either kept in independent databases or in separate tables in the database containing the descriptive records. This practice points at a crucial benefit: by linking any number of descriptive records to an authorized name record, the records related to this entity are collocated in the database. Variant forms of the authorized name are referenced in the authority records and thus ensure the consistency of the database while enabling search and retrieval operations that produce accurate results. On one hand, authority control may be viewed as a positive prerequisite of a consistent catalogue; on the other, the creation of new authority records is a very time consuming and expensive undertaking. As a consequence, various models of providing access to existing authority records have emerged: the Library of Congress and the French National Library (Bibliothèque nationale de France), for example, make their authority records available to all via a web-based search service.3 In Germany, the Personal Name Authority File (PND, Personennamendatei4) maintained by the German National Library (Die Deutsche Bibliothek, Frankfurt/Main) offers a different approach to shared access: within a closed network, participating institutions have online access to their pooled data. The number of recent projects and initiatives that have addressed the issue of authority control in one way or another is considerable.5 Two important current initiatives should be mentioned here: The Name Authority Cooperative (NACO) and Virtual International Authority File (VIAF).
    NACO was established in 1976 and is hosted by the Library of Congress. At the beginning of 2003, nearly 400 institutions were involved in this undertaking, including 43 institutions from outside the United States.6 Despite the enormous success of NACO and the impressive annual growth of the initiative, there are requirements for participation that form an obstacle for many institutions: they have to follow the Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules (AACR2) and employ the MARC217 data format. Participating institutions also have to belong to either OCLC (Online Computer Library Center) or RLG (Research Libraries Group) in order to be able to contribute records, and they have to provide a specified minimum number of authority records per year. A recent proof of concept project of the Library of Congress, OCLC and the German National Library-Virtual International Authority File (VIAF)8-will, in its first phase, test automatic linking of the records of the Library of Congress Name Authority File (LCNAF) and the German Personal Name Authority File by using matching algorithms and software developed by OCLC. The results are expected to form the basis of a "Virtual International Authority File". The project will then test the maintenance of the virtual authority file by employing the Open Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata Harvesting (OAI-PMH)9 to harvest the metadata for new, updated, and deleted records. When using the "Virtual International Authority File" a cataloguer will be able to check the system to see whether the authority record he wants to establish already exists. The final phase of the project will test possibilities for displaying records in the preferred language and script of the end user. Currently, there are still some clear limitations associated with the ways in which authority records are used by memory institutions. One of the main problems has to do with limited access: generally only large institutions or those that are part of a library network have unlimited online access to permanently updated authority records. Smaller institutions outside these networks usually have to fall back on less efficient ways of obtaining authority data, or have no access at all. Cross-domain sharing of authority data between libraries, archives, museums and other memory institutions simply does not happen at present. Public users are, by and large, not even aware that such things as name authority records exist and are excluded from access to these information resources.
  2. Russell, B.M.; Spillane, J.L.: Using the Web for name authority work (2001) 0.02
    0.017440993 = product of:
      0.081391305 = sum of:
        0.05979012 = weight(_text_:web in 167) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05979012 = score(doc=167,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.6182494 = fieldWeight in 167, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=167)
        0.012233062 = weight(_text_:information in 167) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012233062 = score(doc=167,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.23515764 = fieldWeight in 167, 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=167)
        0.009368123 = product of:
          0.028104367 = sum of:
            0.028104367 = weight(_text_:22 in 167) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.028104367 = score(doc=167,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.103770934 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.029633347 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 167, 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=167)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    
    Abstract
    While many catalogers are using the Web to find the information they need to perform authority work quickly and accurately, the full potential of the Web to assist catalogers in name authority work has yet to be realized. The ever-growing nature of the Web means that available information for creating personal name, corporate name, and other types of headings will increase. In this article, we examine ways in which simple and effective Web searching can save catalogers time and money in the process of authority work. In addition, questions involving evaluating authority information found on the Web are explored.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  3. Rotenberg, E.; Kushmerick, A.: ¬The author challenge : identification of self in the scholarly literature (2011) 0.01
    0.014044492 = product of:
      0.06554096 = sum of:
        0.03856498 = weight(_text_:wide in 1332) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03856498 = score(doc=1332,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1312982 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.29372054 = fieldWeight in 1332, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1332)
        0.020922182 = weight(_text_:web in 1332) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020922182 = score(doc=1332,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 1332, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1332)
        0.0060537956 = weight(_text_:information in 1332) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0060537956 = score(doc=1332,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 1332, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1332)
      0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    
    Abstract
    Considering the expansion of research output across the globe, along with the growing demand for quantitative tracking of research outcomes by government authorities and research institutions, the challenges of author identity are increasing. In recent years, a number of initiatives to help solve the author "name game" have been launched from all areas of the scholarly information market space. This article introduces the various author identification tools and services Thomson Reuters provides, including Distinct Author Sets and ResearcherID-which reflect a combination of automated clustering and author participation-as well as the use of other data types, such as grants and patents, to expand the universe of author identification. Industry-wide initiatives such as the Open Researcher and Contributor ID (ORCID) are also described. Future author-related developments in ResearcherID and Thomson Reuters Web of Knowledge are also included.
  4. O'Neill, E.T.; Bennett, R.; Kammerer, K.: Using authorities to improve subject searches (2012) 0.01
    0.01245197 = product of:
      0.058109194 = sum of:
        0.020922182 = weight(_text_:web in 310) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020922182 = score(doc=310,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 310, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=310)
        0.0060537956 = weight(_text_:information in 310) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0060537956 = score(doc=310,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.116372846 = fieldWeight in 310, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=310)
        0.031133216 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 310) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.031133216 = score(doc=310,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.34732026 = fieldWeight in 310, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=310)
      0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    
    Abstract
    Authority files have played an important role in improving the quality of indexing and subject cataloging. Although authorities can significantly improve search by increasing the number of access points, they are rarely an integral part of the information retrieval process, particularly end-users searches. A retrieval prototype, searchFAST, was developed to test the feasibility of using an authority file as an index to bibliographic records. searchFAST uses FAST (Faceted Application of Subject Terminology) as an index to OCLC's WorldCat.org bibliographic database. The searchFAST methodology complements, rather than replaces, existing WorldCat.org access. The bibliographic file is searched indirectly; first the authority file is searched to identify appropriate subject headings, then the headings are used to retrieve the matching bibliographic records. The prototype demonstrates the effectiveness and practicality of using an authority file as an index. Searching the authority file leverages authority control work by increasing the number of access points while supporting a simple interface designed for end-users.
    Source
    Beyond libraries - subject metadata in the digital environment and semantic web. IFLA Satellite Post-Conference, 17-18 August 2012, Tallinn
    Theme
    Verbale Doksprachen im Online-Retrieval
  5. Danowski, P.: Authority files and Web 2.0 : Wikipedia and the PND. An Example (2007) 0.01
    0.012115885 = product of:
      0.056540795 = sum of:
        0.034870304 = weight(_text_:web in 1291) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034870304 = score(doc=1291,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.36057037 = fieldWeight in 1291, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1291)
        0.014978974 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1291) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014978974 = score(doc=1291,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.16710453 = fieldWeight in 1291, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1291)
        0.0066915164 = product of:
          0.020074548 = sum of:
            0.020074548 = weight(_text_:22 in 1291) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.020074548 = score(doc=1291,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.103770934 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.029633347 = queryNorm
                0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1291, product of:
                  1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                    2.0 = termFreq=2.0
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1291)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    
    Abstract
    More and more users index everything on their own in the web 2.0. There are services for links, videos, pictures, books, encyclopaedic articles and scientific articles. All these services are library independent. But must that really be? Can't libraries help with their experience and tools to make user indexing better? On the experience of a project from German language Wikipedia together with the German person authority files (Personen Namen Datei - PND) located at German National Library (Deutsche Nationalbibliothek) I would like to show what is possible. How users can and will use the authority files, if we let them. We will take a look how the project worked and what we can learn for future projects. Conclusions - Authority files can have a role in the web 2.0 - there must be an open interface/ service for retrieval - everything that is indexed on the net with authority files can be easy integrated in a federated search - O'Reilly: You have to found ways that your data get more important that more it will be used
    Content
    Vortrag anlässlich des Workshops: "Extending the multilingual capacity of The European Library in the EDL project Stockholm, Swedish National Library, 22-23 November 2007".
    Object
    Web 2.0
  6. Wolverton, R.E.: Becoming an authority on authority control : an annotated bibliography of resources (2006) 0.01
    0.010918014 = product of:
      0.05095073 = sum of:
        0.034519844 = weight(_text_:web in 120) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.034519844 = score(doc=120,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.35694647 = fieldWeight in 120, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=120)
        0.0070627616 = weight(_text_:information in 120) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0070627616 = score(doc=120,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 120, 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=120)
        0.009368123 = product of:
          0.028104367 = sum of:
            0.028104367 = weight(_text_:22 in 120) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.028104367 = score(doc=120,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.103770934 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.029633347 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 120, 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=120)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    
    Abstract
    Authority control has long been an important part of the cataloging process. However, few studies have been conducted examining how librarians learn about it. Research conducted to date suggests that many librarians learn about authority control on the job rather than in formal classes. To offer an introduction to authority control information for librarians, an annotated bibliography is provided. It includes monographs, articles and papers, electronic discussion groups, Web sites related to professional conferences, additional Web sites related to authority control, and training offered through the Name Authority Cooperative Program and the Subject Authority Cooperative Program. A summary of possible future trends in authority control is also provided.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  7. O'Neill, E.T.; Bennett, R.; Kammerer, K.: Using authorities to improve subject searches (2014) 0.01
    0.0103766415 = product of:
      0.048424326 = sum of:
        0.017435152 = weight(_text_:web in 1970) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017435152 = score(doc=1970,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 1970, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1970)
        0.0050448296 = weight(_text_:information in 1970) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0050448296 = score(doc=1970,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 1970, 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=1970)
        0.025944345 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 1970) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025944345 = score(doc=1970,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.28943354 = fieldWeight in 1970, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1970)
      0.21428572 = coord(3/14)
    
    Abstract
    Authority files have played an important role in improving the quality of indexing and subject cataloging. Although authorities can significantly improve searching by increasing the number of access points, they are rarely an integral part of the information retrieval process, particularly end-users' searches. A retrieval prototype, searchFAST, was developed to test the feasibility of using an authority file as an index to bibliographic records. searchFAST uses Faceted Application of Subject Terminology (FAST) as an index to OCLC's WorldCat.org bibliographic database. The searchFAST prototype complements, rather than replaces, existing WorldCat.org access. The bibliographic file is searched indirectly; first the authority file is searched to identify appropriate subject headings, then the headings are used to retrieve the matching bibliographic records. The prototype demonstrates the effectiveness and practicality of using an authority file as an index. Searching the authority file leverages authority control work by increasing the number of access points while supporting a simple interface designed for end-users.
    Footnote
    Contribution in a special issue "Beyond libraries: Subject metadata in the digital environment and Semantic Web" - Enthält Beiträge der gleichnamigen IFLA Satellite Post-Conference, 17-18 August 2012, Tallinn.
    Theme
    Verbale Doksprachen im Online-Retrieval
  8. Buizza, P.: Bibliographic control and authority control from Paris principles to the present (2004) 0.01
    0.009736202 = product of:
      0.06815341 = sum of:
        0.03856498 = weight(_text_:wide in 5667) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03856498 = score(doc=5667,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1312982 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.29372054 = fieldWeight in 5667, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.4307585 = idf(docFreq=1430, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5667)
        0.029588435 = weight(_text_:web in 5667) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029588435 = score(doc=5667,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.3059541 = fieldWeight in 5667, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5667)
      0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    
    Abstract
    Forty years ago the ICCP in Paris laid the foundations of international co-operation in descriptive cataloging without explicitly speaking of authority control. Some of the factors in the evolution of authority control are the development of catalogs (from card catalog to local automation, to today's OPAC on the Web) and services provided by libraries (from individual service to local users to system networks, to the World Wide Web), as well as international agreements on cataloging (from Paris Principles to the UBC programme, to the report on Mandatory data elements for internationally shared resource authority records). This evolution progressed from the principle of uniform heading to the definition of authority entries and records, and from the responsibility of national bibliographic agencies for the form of the names of their own authors to be shared internationally to the concept of authorized equivalent heading. Some issues of the present state are the persisting differences among national rules and the aim of respecting both local culture and language and international readability.
  9. Souza, R. de Mattos: ¬The representation of archival information in controlled vocabularies : the context of the archival institutions in Rio de Janeiro (2019) 0.01
    0.0065890946 = product of:
      0.04612366 = sum of:
        0.020179318 = weight(_text_:information in 5490) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020179318 = score(doc=5490,freq=32.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.38790947 = fieldWeight in 5490, product of:
              5.656854 = tf(freq=32.0), with freq of:
                32.0 = termFreq=32.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5490)
        0.025944345 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5490) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.025944345 = score(doc=5490,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.28943354 = fieldWeight in 5490, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5490)
      0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    
    Abstract
    We aim to trace the scenario of the use of controlled vocabularies as tools of research and work in the scope of representation and retrieval of information in institutions that have archival collections, in order to highlight the need for greater emphasis on the subject of representation of archival information in the academic field, increasing the visibility for the study and analysis of the collections in question and their contents, relevant to the information society. We investigate the current scenario of the use of controlled vocabularies in the archival collections of Rio de Janeiro, the theoretical-methodological changes arising from the impacts of information technologies on analysis, representation, such as classification and indexing, content retrieval, information needs in the contemporary world. The representation of information is associated with classification and retrieval of information to the organization of knowledge in information science. There is a gap in the archival area regarding the expression representation of information from the description of the nineteenth century. As for the theoretical-methodological aspect, there was a theoretical survey of the representation of information in publications in the interdisciplinary areas; as to the op-erational methodology, questionnaires were applied to information agencies on the use of controlled vocabularies, in relation to the treatment of information in archival collections. We conclude by demonstrating the importance of adopting the concept of information representation in archives, using controlled vocabularies associated with new information technologies and informational ecology, consolidating the area as a scientific and interdisciplinary field for information science.
  10. Pika, J.; Pika-Biolzi, M.: Multilingual subject access and classification-based browsing through authority control : the experience of the ETH-Bibliothek, Zürich (2015) 0.01
    0.006295258 = product of:
      0.044066805 = sum of:
        0.039021976 = weight(_text_:bibliothek in 2295) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.039021976 = score(doc=2295,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.121660605 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1055303 = idf(docFreq=1980, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.32074454 = fieldWeight in 2295, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.1055303 = idf(docFreq=1980, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2295)
        0.0050448296 = weight(_text_:information in 2295) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0050448296 = score(doc=2295,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 2295, 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=2295)
      0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    
    Abstract
    The paper provides an illustration of the benefits of subject authority control improving multilingual subject access in NEBIS - Netzwerk von Bibliotheken und Informationsstellen in der Schweiz. This example of good practice focuses on some important aspects of classification and indexing. NEBIS subject authorities comprise a classification scheme and multilingual subject descriptor system. A bibliographic system supported by subject authority control empowers libraries as it enables them to expand and adjust vocabulary and link subjects to suit their specific audience. Most importantly it allows the management of different subject vocabularies in numerous languages. In addition, such an enriched subject index creates re-usable and shareable source of subject statements that has value in the wider context of information exchange. The illustrations and supporting arguments are based on indexing practice, subject authority control and use of classification in ETH-Bibliothek, which is the largest library within the NEBIS network.
  11. Gültekin, V.: ¬An historical look at the studies on the subject authority file in Turkey (2019) 0.01
    0.005729974 = product of:
      0.040109813 = sum of:
        0.016143454 = weight(_text_:information in 5480) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016143454 = score(doc=5480,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.3103276 = fieldWeight in 5480, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5480)
        0.023966359 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5480) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.023966359 = score(doc=5480,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.26736724 = fieldWeight in 5480, 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=5480)
      0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    
    Abstract
    Libraries are bridges between information and the library user in the context of information retrieval. Library users want to access information resources according to their topic. Therefore, it is important to create subject entries in bibliographic records. If subject added entries and their redirects are done correctly, it will make it easier for users to access the information they are looking for. In this article the collaborative studies and projects made in Turkey are being discussed.
  12. Dean, R.J.: FAST: development of simplified headings for metadata (2004) 0.01
    0.0055567077 = product of:
      0.03889695 = sum of:
        0.020922182 = weight(_text_:web in 5682) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020922182 = score(doc=5682,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.21634221 = fieldWeight in 5682, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5682)
        0.01797477 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5682) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01797477 = score(doc=5682,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.20052543 = fieldWeight in 5682, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=5682)
      0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    
    Abstract
    The Library of Congress Subject Headings schema (LCSH) is the most commonly used and widely accepted subject vocabulary for general application. It is the de facto universal controlled vocabulary and has been a model for developing subject heading systems by many countries. However, LCSH's complex syntax and rules for constructing headings restrict its application by requiring highly skilled personnel and limit the effectiveness of automated authority control. Recent trends, driven to a large extent by the rapid growth of the Web, are forcing changes in bibliographic control systems to make them easier to use, understand, and apply, and subject headings are no exception. The purpose of adapting the LCSH with a simplified syntax to create FAST (Faceted Application of Subject Terminology) headings is to retain the very rich vocabulary of LCSH while making the schema easier to understand, control, apply, and use. The schema maintains compatibility with LCSH--any valid Library of Congress subject heading can be converted to FAST headings.
    Theme
    Verbale Doksprachen im Online-Retrieval
  13. Smiraglia, R.P.: Authority control of works: cataloging's chimera? (2004) 0.01
    0.005516946 = product of:
      0.03861862 = sum of:
        0.017435152 = weight(_text_:web in 5678) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.017435152 = score(doc=5678,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.18028519 = fieldWeight in 5678, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5678)
        0.021183468 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 5678) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021183468 = score(doc=5678,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.23632148 = fieldWeight in 5678, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5678)
      0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    
    Abstract
    Explicit authority control of works is essentially non-existent. Our catalogs are built on a principle of controlling headings, and primarily headings for names of authors. Our syndetic structure creates a spider's web of networked relationships among forms of headings, but it ends there, despite the potential richness of depth among bibliographic entities. Effective authority control of works could yield richness in the catalog that would enhance retrieval capabilities. Works are considered to constitute the intellectual content of informative artifacts that may be collected and ordered for retrieval. In a 1992 study the author examined a random sample of works drawn from the catalog of the Georgetown University Library. For each progenitor work, an instantiation network (also referred to as a bibliographic family) was constituted. A detailed analysis of the linkages that would be required for authority control of these networks is reviewed here. A new study is also presented, in which Library of Congress authority records for the works in this sample are sought and analyzed. Results demonstrate a near total lack of control, with only 5.6% of works for which authority records were found. From a sample of 410 works, of which nearly half have instantiation networks, only 23 works could be said to have implicit authority control. However, many instantiation networks are made up of successive derivations that can be implicitly linked through collocation. The difficult work of explicitly linking instantiations comes with title changes, translations, and containing relations. The empirical evidence in the present study suggests that explicit control of expressions will provide the best control over instantiation networks because it is instantiations such as translations, abridgments, and adaptations that require explicit linking.
  14. Oehlschläger, S.: Treffpunkt Standardisierung : Der Standardisierungsausschuss beim 94. Deutschen Bibliothekartag in Düsseldorf (2005) 0.01
    0.005451853 = product of:
      0.03816297 = sum of:
        0.03379402 = weight(_text_:bibliothek in 3691) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03379402 = score(doc=3691,freq=12.0), product of:
            0.121660605 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.1055303 = idf(docFreq=1980, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.2777729 = fieldWeight in 3691, product of:
              3.4641016 = tf(freq=12.0), with freq of:
                12.0 = termFreq=12.0
              4.1055303 = idf(docFreq=1980, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=3691)
        0.004368951 = weight(_text_:information in 3691) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.004368951 = score(doc=3691,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.083984874 = fieldWeight in 3691, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.01953125 = fieldNorm(doc=3691)
      0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    
    Content
    "Nach Augsburg, Bielefeld und Leipzig hat der Standardisierungsausschuss beim 94. Deutschen Bibliothekartag in Düsseldorf zum vierten Mal in Folge eine Veranstaltung zum Themenfeld Standardisierung durchgeführt, die vom Vorsitzenden, Berndt Dugall, moderiert wurde. Auch in diesem Jahr konnten dafür wieder zwei Referenten aus dem Ausland gewonnen werden, die einen Einblick in internationale Aktivitäten gewährten. Den Auftakt bildete Jeffrey Garrett von der Northwestern University Library in Evanston, Illinois mit seinem Vortrag »Entscheidend auch hier der Einstieg - Wandel und Kontinuität im Ethos des Katalogisierens in den USA«. Zunächst erläuterte der Referent die Losung aus dem Titel, die aus dem Werk »Bücherlabyrinthe: Suchen und Finden im alexandrinischen Zeitalter« von Nikolaus Wegmann stammt. Dieses Buch erinnere daran, dass der Katalog in der Nachfolge von Schrettinger und Dewey den Einstieg des Benutzers in die ansonsten gewaltige Unordnung der Bibliothek ermögliche, und dadurch die »Sichtbarkeit« der modernen Forschungsbibliothek erst her- bzw. sicherstellt. Garrett stellte die Frage nach dem Sinn von Katalogen im elektronischen Zeitalter, einer Zeit, in der bibliografische Angaben beziehungsweise Schlagworte durch Volltextrecherchen, die sich gleichzeitig auf mehrere tausend Publikationen erstrecken können, umgangen werden können, und in welcher der Inhalt eines Textes in ständigem Wandel begriffen ist. In seinem Vortrag hat der Referent einige Entwicklungen auf dem Gebiet des Katalogisierens in den USA teils theoretisch, teils konkret nachgezeichnet, in der Absicht, sowohl den Wandel als auch die Kontinuität im Bereich der Erschließung aufzuzeigen. Die bisweilen geäußerte Feststellung, dass Kataloge auf den Müllhaufen der Geschichte gehörten, bezeichnete Garrett als maßlos übertrieben und nur angesichts des »Google-Schocks« in den USA zu erklären. Der Katalog diene nach wie vor als Beschreibung des Volltexts. Der Moderator kommentierte dazu, dass der Gedanke des »Vanishing catalogue« vergleichbar sei mit dem Traum vom papierlosen Büro. Patrick Le Boeuf, der Vorsitzende der IFLA FRBR Review Group, referierte in seinem Vortrag »Zwischen Traum und Wirklichkeit« über die Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR). Anhand von leicht verständlichen Beispielen erläuterte er, was die FRBR mit den vier Entitäten der Gruppe 1: Werk (work), Fassung (expression), Erscheinungsform (manifestation) und Exemplar (item) sind. Ausführlich ging er auch darauf ein, was die FRBR nicht sind und was sie nicht leisten können. Es handelt sich dabei weder um eine Norm, noch um ein Datenmodell oder gar ein Format. Dennoch haben die FRBR Einfluss auf die Standardisierungsaktivitäten auf internationaler wie nationaler Ebene. In einigen Systemen, Prototypen und Projekten lässt sich das Potenzial des FRBRModells für bibliografische Informationen bereits aufzeigen. Ganz konkret werden die FRBR in die Überlegungen der IFLA Meetings of Experts an an International Cataloguing Code einbezogen und haben Einzug in die »Frankfurt principles« gefunden, deren Ziel eine Aktualisierung der »Paris principles« ist, und die bei nachfolgenden Regionaltreffen bis 2007 von Kolleginnen und Kollegen aus allen Teilen der WeIt weiter diskutiert und modifiziert werden. Durch die gegenwärtige Revision der Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules (AACR) werden die FRBR auch Einzug in das internationale Regelwerk halten.
    Mit großer Spannung wurde der Vortrag von Elisabeth Niggemann und Reiner Diedrichs über das weitere Vorgehen nach Abschluss des Projekts »Umstieg auf internationale Formate und Regelwerke (MARC21, AACR2)« erwartet. Unter dem programmatischen Titel »Hinter dem Horizont geht es weiter« stellten der Vorsitzende der Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Verbundsysteme und die Generaldirektorin Der Deutschen Bibliothek vor, wie die Internationalisierung der deutschen Standards im Einzelnen aussehen soll, und welche Maßnahmen erforderlich sind. Die Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Verbundsysteme hatte in ihrer Herbstsitzung 2004 verschiedene Beschlüsse getroffen, welche die Zusammenarbeit der Verbundsysteme fördern und erleichtern sollen. Dazu gehören u. a. die Entwicklung eines prototypischen Verfahrens für einen Neukatalogisierungsdienst mit einheitlichen Datenstrukturen und einheitlichen Formatanwendungen, die Verwendung von MARC21 als einheitlichem Austauschformat und die Entwicklung eines Matchkey-Verfahrens zur verbundübergreifenden Titelerkennung. Außerdem wurden grundsätzliche Anforderungen an das künftige Regelwerk und für eine Reorganisation der Normdatenarbeit formuliert, die die Ziele der Arbeitsgemeinschaft effektiv unterstützen sollen. Der Standardisierungsausschuss hat diese Beschlüsse in seiner 9. Sitzung im Dezember 2004 begrüßt, bestätigt und konkretisiert. Nun gilt es, die Beschlüsse zügig umzusetzen, um die gesteckten Ziele zu verfolgen: einfacher Zugang zu bibliografischer Information national wie international für wissenschaftliche und andere persönliche Nutzer, leichte Austauschbarkeit von bibliografischer Information zwischen professionellen Benutzergruppen und Anwendern und last but not least Kostenreduktion bei der Erschließung. Im Anschluss stellte Renate Gömpel, Die Deutsche Bibliothek, die IFLA-CDNL Allianz für Bibliografische Standards (ICABS) vor, die während des Weltkongresses Bibliothek und Information in Berlin als ein neues strategisches Vorhaben ins Leben gerufen wurde. Mit ICABS streben die National Library of Australia, die Library of Congress, die British Library, die Koninklijke Bibliotheek der Niederlande und Die Deutsche Bibliothek gemeinsam mit der Biblioteca Nacional Portugals, der IFLA und der Conference of Directors of National Libraries (CDNL) die Fortsetzung und Unterstützung von Schlüsselaktivitäten im Bereich der bibliografischen und der Ressourcenkontrolle sowie damit zusammenhängender Formatstandards an. Die Allianz führt damit die Arbeit der Geschäftsstellen der früheren IFLA-Kernprogramme UBCIM (Universal Bibliographic Control and International MARC) und UDT (Universal Dataflow and Telecommunications) fort. In dem Vortrag wurde ein Überblick über Ziele und Vorhaben von ICABS, ihre Organisation sowie deren Arbeit als Dach für facettenreiche Aktivitäten im Bereich bibliografischer Standards gegeben. Koordiniert wird die Arbeit von ICABS durch das Advisory Board, das aus Vertretern aller beteiligten Institutionen und Organisationen besteht und dessen Vorsitz gegenwärtig ebenso wie das Sekretariat bei Der Deutschen Bibliothek angesiedelt ist. Der Standardisierungsausschuss hat bereits erste Planungen für eine Veranstaltung beim 95. Deutschen Bibliothekartag in Dresden angestellt. Dort soll über den Stand der Internationalisierung des deutschen Regelwerks, den Umstieg auf MARC21 und die Weiterentwicklung der Normdateien berichtet werden. Darüber hinaus erwartet die Teilnehmerinnen und Teilnehmer ein Bericht aus dem Joint Steering Committee for Revision of Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules (JSC) über den Stand der AACR3. Es wird sicherlich spannend, merken Sie sich diesen Termin vor."
  15. Tillett, B.B.: Complementarity of perspectives for resource descriptions (2015) 0.01
    0.0050347717 = product of:
      0.0352434 = sum of:
        0.03019857 = weight(_text_:web in 2288) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.03019857 = score(doc=2288,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.3122631 = fieldWeight in 2288, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2288)
        0.0050448296 = weight(_text_:information in 2288) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0050448296 = score(doc=2288,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 2288, 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=2288)
      0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    
    Abstract
    Bibliographic data is used to describe resources held in the collections of libraries, archives and museums. That data is mostly available on the Web today and mostly as linked data. Also on the Web are the controlled vocabulary systems of name authority files, like the Virtual International Authority File (VIAF), classification systems, and subject terms. These systems offer their own linked data to potentially help users find the information they want - whether at their local library or anywhere in the world that is willing to make their resources available. We have found it beneficial to merge authority data for names on a global level, as the entities are relatively clear. That is not true for subject concepts and terminology that have categorisation systems developed according to varying principles and schemes and are in multiple languages. Rather than requiring everyone in the world to use the same categorisation/classification system in the same language, we know that the Web offers us the opportunity to add descriptors assigned around the world using multiple systems from multiple perspectives to identify our resources. Those descriptors add value to refine searches, help users worldwide and share globally what each library does locally.
  16. Hickey, T.B.; Toves, J.; O'Neill, E.T.: NACO normalization : a detailed examination of the authority file comparison rules (2006) 0.00
    0.004825334 = product of:
      0.033777338 = sum of:
        0.024409214 = weight(_text_:web in 5760) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024409214 = score(doc=5760,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.25239927 = fieldWeight in 5760, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5760)
        0.009368123 = product of:
          0.028104367 = sum of:
            0.028104367 = weight(_text_:22 in 5760) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
              0.028104367 = score(doc=5760,freq=2.0), product of:
                0.103770934 = queryWeight, product of:
                  3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
                  0.029633347 = queryNorm
                0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 5760, 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=5760)
          0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
      0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    
    Abstract
    Normalization rules are essential for interoperability between bibliographic systems. In the process of working with Name Authority Cooperative Program (NACO) authority files to match records with Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) and developing the Faceted Application of Subject Terminology (FAST) subject heading schema, the authors found inconsistencies in independently created NACO normalization implementations. Investigating these, the authors found ambiguities in the NACO standard that need resolution, and came to conclusions on how the procedure could be simplified with little impact on matching headings. To encourage others to test their software for compliance with the current rules, the authors have established a Web site that has test files and interactive services showing their current implementation.
    Date
    10. 9.2000 17:38:22
  17. Balikova, M.: Multilingual Subject Access to Catalogues of National Libraries (MSAC) : Czech Republic's collaboration with Slovakia, Slovenia, Croatia, Macedonia, Lithuania and Latvia (2005) 0.00
    0.004643254 = product of:
      0.032502778 = sum of:
        0.005707573 = weight(_text_:information in 4349) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.005707573 = score(doc=4349,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.10971737 = fieldWeight in 4349, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4349)
        0.026795205 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 4349) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.026795205 = score(doc=4349,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.29892567 = fieldWeight in 4349, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=4349)
      0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    
    Abstract
    Czech authority file of topical terms is intended to form a base for multilingual controlled vocabulary. The aim of the proposal is to provide users of online library catalogues and internet services of cooperating institutions with an indexing and retrieval tool which enables multilingual and cross-domain searching ("one-stop" seamless searching). The goal of the project is to establish a multilingual subject approach to catalogues of participating libraries (Czechia, Croatia, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Slovakia, and Slovenia). In practice this means that a user in any of these countries would enter a query in his local language and receive hits from all the catalogues. The initiative is complying with the main goals currently defined by IFLA for the activity of Indexing and Classification Section, it means: Changing Roles of Subject Access Tools (Berlin), Implementation and Adaptation of Global Tools for Subject Access to Local Needs (Buenos Aires), and Cataloguing and Subject Tools for Global Access: International Partnerships (Oslo).
    Content
    The aim of this initiative is to provide the users of online library catalogues and information gateways of cooperating libraries with a prototype for multilingual subject searching in online environment. Library collections of these libraries are large and without any doubt very valuable for researchers throughout Europe. What is needed is a standardized, authorized indexing and retrieval tool which would bring together all their catalogues and databases and enable multilingual subject searching. At the beginning of the project, a number of factors affecting subject indexing in current environment and cross-searching for subjects have been identified. These factors include - standardization of subject retrieval process and indexing and classification tools - subject retrieval methods - possibility of interoperability among different indexing and classification schemes - multilingualism issue - possibility to increase precision and recall trough Z39.50 protocol and its profiles and to apply authority control in subject retrieval process - need for cooperation
    Footnote
    Vortrag, World Library and Information Congress: 71th IFLA General Conference and Council "Libraries - A voyage of discovery", August 14th - 18th 2005, Oslo, Norway.
  18. Tillett, B.B.: Authority control : state of the art and new perspectives (2004) 0.00
    0.0044959965 = product of:
      0.031471975 = sum of:
        0.024409214 = weight(_text_:web in 5655) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024409214 = score(doc=5655,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.25239927 = fieldWeight in 5655, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=5655)
        0.0070627616 = weight(_text_:information in 5655) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0070627616 = score(doc=5655,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 5655, 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=5655)
      0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    
    Abstract
    Authority control is necessary for meeting the catalog's objectives of enabling users to find the works of an author and to collocate all works of a person or corporate body. This article looks at the current state of authority control as compared to the visions of the 1979 LITA (Library Information and Technology Association) Institutes and the 1984 Authority Control Interest Group. It explores a new view of IFLA's Universal Bibliographic Control (UBC) and a future vision of a virtual international authority file as a building block for the Semantic Web and reinforces the importance of authority control to improve the precision of searches of large databases or the Internet.
  19. Zhu, L.; Xu, A.; Deng, S.; Heng, G.; Li, X.: Entity management using Wikidata for cultural heritage information (2024) 0.00
    0.0044959965 = product of:
      0.031471975 = sum of:
        0.024409214 = weight(_text_:web in 975) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.024409214 = score(doc=975,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.09670874 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.25239927 = fieldWeight in 975, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.2635105 = idf(docFreq=4597, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=975)
        0.0070627616 = weight(_text_:information in 975) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0070627616 = score(doc=975,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.13576832 = fieldWeight in 975, 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=975)
      0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    
    Abstract
    Entity management in a Linked Open Data (LOD) environment is a process of associating a unique, persistent, and dereferenceable Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) with a single entity. It allows data from various sources to be reused and connected to the Web. It can help improve data quality and enable more efficient workflows. This article describes a semi-automated entity management project conducted by the "Wikidata: WikiProject Chinese Culture and Heritage Group," explores the challenges and opportunities in describing Chinese women poets and historical places in Wikidata, the largest crowdsourcing LOD platform in the world, and discusses lessons learned and future opportunities.
  20. Cordeiro, M.I.: From library authority control to network authoritative metadata sources (2003) 0.00
    0.00446759 = product of:
      0.031273127 = sum of:
        0.010089659 = weight(_text_:information in 3083) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.010089659 = score(doc=3083,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.052020688 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.19395474 = fieldWeight in 3083, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3083)
        0.021183468 = weight(_text_:retrieval in 3083) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.021183468 = score(doc=3083,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08963835 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.029633347 = queryNorm
            0.23632148 = fieldWeight in 3083, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.024915 = idf(docFreq=5836, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3083)
      0.14285715 = coord(2/14)
    
    Abstract
    Authority control is a quite recent term in the long history of cataloguing, although the underlying principle is among the very early principles of bibliographic control. Bibliographic control is a Field in transformation by the rapid expansion of the WWW, which has brought new problems to infonnation discovery and retrieval, creating new challenges and requirements in information management. In a comprehensive approach, authority control is presented as one of the most promising library activities in this respect. The evolution of work methods and standards for the sharing of authority files is reviewed, showing the imbalance in developments and practical achievements between name and subject authority, in an international perspective. The need to improve the network availability and usability of authority information assets in more effective and holistic ways is underlyned; and a new philosophy and scope is proposed for library authority work, based an the primacy of the linking function of authority data, and by expanding the finding, relating and informing functions of authority records. Some of these aspects are being addressed in several projects dealing with knowledge organization systems, notably to cope with multilingual needs and to enable semantic interoperability among different systems. Library practice itself should evolve in the same direction, thereby providing practical experience to inform new or improved principles and standards for authority work, while contributing to enhance local information services and to promote their involvement in the WWW environment.
    Source
    Subject retrieval in a networked environment: Proceedings of the IFLA Satellite Meeting held in Dublin, OH, 14-16 August 2001 and sponsored by the IFLA Classification and Indexing Section, the IFLA Information Technology Section and OCLC. Ed.: I.C. McIlwaine

Years

Types

  • a 67
  • el 7
  • b 2
  • More… Less…