Search (7 results, page 1 of 1)

0.0034868855 = product of:
  0.04009918 = sum of:
    0.029957397 = product of:
      0.059914794 = sum of:
        0.059914794 = weight(_text_:kataloge in 2973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.059914794 = score(doc=2973,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1351219 = queryWeight, product of:
              5.733308 = idf(docFreq=388, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.4434129 = fieldWeight in 2973, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              5.733308 = idf(docFreq=388, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2973)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.010141784 = product of:
      0.020283569 = sum of:
        0.020283569 = weight(_text_:international in 2973) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.020283569 = score(doc=2973,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.078619614 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.2579963 = fieldWeight in 2973, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=2973)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.08695652 = coord(2/23)

Abstract

This article discusses the changes that are occurring in the world of cataloguing. It argues that these changes need to be coordinated. It also discusses the feature of current OPACs, FRBR, the Paris Principles and its proposed replacement (ICP), AACR2 and its proposed replacement (RDA), ISBD, and the relationships between and among these standards. It argues that the syntax of ISBD is an essential component of RDA and all future international and national cataloguing codes.

Theme

Geschichte der Kataloge

0.0020082113 = product of:
  0.02309443 = sum of:
    0.0039282576 = product of:
      0.007856515 = sum of:
        0.007856515 = weight(_text_:1 in 258) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.007856515 = score(doc=258,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.057894554 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.13570388 = fieldWeight in 258, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=258)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.019166173 = product of:
      0.038332347 = sum of:
        0.038332347 = weight(_text_:international in 258) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038332347 = score(doc=258,freq=14.0), product of:
            0.078619614 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.48756722 = fieldWeight in 258, product of:
              3.7416575 = tf(freq=14.0), with freq of:
                14.0 = termFreq=14.0
              3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=258)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.08695652 = coord(2/23)

Abstract

Many current cataloguing codes have their roots in a common tradition started by the 1961 Paris International Conference on Cataloguing Principles-ICCP. Since 1961, the construction of new national codes had been based on the sharing of cataloguing principles, on agreements for international cooperation, and on a common tradition. The new technological and international environment suggests, more and more, a redesign of those principles to include more suitable features and to assert firmly that the highest principle is the convenience of the users of the catalogue. Within this framework, the authors analyze the Italian cataloguing tradition and its relationships with the international tradition and recount the main activities towards a revision of the present Italian code-Regole italiane di catalogazione per autori RICA. The paper shows that, since the first Italian rules written by Fumagalli, special attention has been paid to the international tradition (in particular toward Panizzi's rules). After describing the relationships among the international trends and the Italian codes of 1922, 1956 and 1979, the paper deals with the recent works of the new Commission that, since 1997, has started to revise RICA. The paper concludes by reflecting on the Italian position in the debate first on the ISBD and then on the new entity-relationship models.

Source

Cataloging and classification quarterly. 44(2007) nos.1/2, S.131-150

0.0019718967 = product of:
  0.022676812 = sum of:
    0.0062852125 = product of:
      0.012570425 = sum of:
        0.012570425 = weight(_text_:1 in 2944) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012570425 = score(doc=2944,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.057894554 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.2171262 = fieldWeight in 2944, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2944)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.0163916 = product of:
      0.0327832 = sum of:
        0.0327832 = weight(_text_:international in 2944) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0327832 = score(doc=2944,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.078619614 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.416985 = fieldWeight in 2944, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=2944)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.08695652 = coord(2/23)

Abstract

This issue of Jlis.it is focused on RDA, Resource Description and Access. In light of increasing international acceptance of this new cataloging content standard, the editors of Jlis.it wish to capture the background of how RDA came to be and the implications of its implementation at this time. This special issue offers a wide overview on the new guidelines from their making to their spreading around the world.

Source

Jlis.it. 7(2016) no.2, S.1-5

0.0013130999 = product of:
  0.015100648 = sum of:
    0.007856515 = product of:
      0.01571303 = sum of:
        0.01571303 = weight(_text_:1 in 5616) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.01571303 = score(doc=5616,freq=8.0), product of:
            0.057894554 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.27140775 = fieldWeight in 5616, product of:
              2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
                8.0 = termFreq=8.0
              2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5616)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
    0.0072441325 = product of:
      0.014488265 = sum of:
        0.014488265 = weight(_text_:international in 5616) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.014488265 = score(doc=5616,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.078619614 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.18428308 = fieldWeight in 5616, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5616)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.08695652 = coord(2/23)

Abstract

In June 1995 the ABEI (Italian Catholic Librarians Association) established a working group in order to create an authority list of Catholic authors, (persons and corporate bodies) and of liturgical and religious anonymous works, titled ACOLIT, Autori Cattolici e Opere Liturgiche in Italiano (Catholic Authors and Liturgical Works in Italian). ACOLIT contains: (1) personal authors (particularly of the apostolic period and the Middle Ages); (2) popes and antipopes; (3) religious congregations, orders and societies; (4) Catholic Church and Roman Curia; (5) Catholic associations; (6) the Bible; (7) liturgical works; (8) religious anonymous works. Headings are established according to the RICA (Regole Italiane di Catalogazione per Autori), but also to the Norme per il catalogo degli stampati by the Vatican Library, the AACR2R, the RAK, the Reglas de catalogaci = F3n. Ed. refundita y rev., and the guidelines and decisions of IFLA. The work group has elaborated original considerations, particularly for the Bible. The group argues the choice and forth of the names of popes, Catholic Church and Roman Curia of the RICA and suggests that classical and Medieval writers should be formulated in Italian not in Latin, and that the indirect form, surname-name, should be used for saints who have a surname. ACOLIT has accepted the GARE punctuation (Guidelines for authority and reference entries/ recommended by the Working Group on an International Authority System; approved by the Standing Committees of the IFLA Section on Cataloguing and the IFLA Section on Information Technology). The print edition is planned for June 1997. ACOLIT will present headings in three sections: (1) Personal writers; (2) Corporate bodies; (1) Bible Liturgical and religious anonymous works, ABEI will also publish an electronic edition (CD ROM), periodically revised. The research will extend to Christian writers and -in the future- to writers of all religions.

Date

1. 8.2006 14:39:05

9.905973E-4 = product of:
  0.022783738 = sum of:
    0.022783738 = product of:
      0.045567475 = sum of:
        0.045567475 = weight(_text_:29 in 3947) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.045567475 = score(doc=3947,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.08290443 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.5496386 = fieldWeight in 3947, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5176873 = idf(docFreq=3565, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3947)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.04347826 = coord(1/23)

Date

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

8.451325E-4 = product of:
  0.019438047 = sum of:
    0.019438047 = product of:
      0.038876094 = sum of:
        0.038876094 = weight(_text_:international in 2006) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.038876094 = score(doc=2006,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.078619614 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.49448338 = fieldWeight in 2006, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              3.33588 = idf(docFreq=4276, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2006)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.04347826 = coord(1/23)

Abstract

Since the end of the last century, catalogs have been changing more and more quickly. This change is following a recognizable course, beginning with the publication of Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records, passing through the reorganization of international cataloging principles, the revision of international standards of the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (International Standard for Bibliographic Description), and the foundation of new cataloging codes, such as Resource Description and Access. While principles, models, and rules are well established, bibliographic formats seem to be a bottleneck and users seem far from libraries. This article aims to present an overview of current changes, potential convergences, developments, and weak points from Ranganathan's point of view.

Content

Beitrag in einem Themenheft: Reshaping the Library Catalog: Selected Papers from the International Conference FSR2014 (Rome, February 27-28, 2014).

3.5498835E-4 = product of:
  0.008164732 = sum of:
    0.008164732 = product of:
      0.016329464 = sum of:
        0.016329464 = weight(_text_:1 in 2624) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.016329464 = score(doc=2624,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.057894554 = queryWeight, product of:
              2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
              0.023567878 = queryNorm
            0.28205526 = fieldWeight in 2624, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              2.4565027 = idf(docFreq=10304, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2624)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.04347826 = coord(1/23)

Source

Jlis.it. 1(2010) no.1, S.1-10