-
Taniguchi, S.: Mapping and merging of IFLA Library Reference Model and BIBFRAME 2.0 (2018)
0.00
0.0010484952 = product of:
0.015727427 = sum of:
0.015727427 = weight(_text_:und in 5162) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.015727427 = score(doc=5162,freq=2.0), product of:
0.06422601 = queryWeight, product of:
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.028978055 = queryNorm
0.24487628 = fieldWeight in 5162, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=5162)
0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
- Abstract
- Zusammenfassung von FRBR, FRAD und FRSAD in einem Modell (vgl. das Modell selbst).
-
Taniguchi, S.: ¬An analysis of orientedness in cataloging rules (1999)
0.00
4.604387E-4 = product of:
0.00690658 = sum of:
0.00690658 = product of:
0.01381316 = sum of:
0.01381316 = weight(_text_:information in 4305) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.01381316 = score(doc=4305,freq=2.0), product of:
0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.028978055 = queryNorm
0.27153665 = fieldWeight in 4305, product of:
1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
2.0 = termFreq=2.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=4305)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 50(1999) no.5, S.448-460
-
Tokita, T.; Koto, M.; Miyata, Y.; Yokoyama, Y.; Taniguchi, S.; Ueda, S.: Identifying works for Japanese classics toward construction of FRBRized OPACs (2012)
0.00
3.255793E-4 = product of:
0.0048836893 = sum of:
0.0048836893 = product of:
0.009767379 = sum of:
0.009767379 = weight(_text_:information in 1925) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.009767379 = score(doc=1925,freq=4.0), product of:
0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.028978055 = queryNorm
0.1920054 = fieldWeight in 1925, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1925)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
- Abstract
- A research project was conducted in which proper JAPAN/MARC bibliographic records for 158 major Japanese classical works were identified manually, since existing records contain little information about works included in the resources. This paper reports the detailed method used for work identification, including selecting works, obtaining the bibliographic records to be judged, and building the judgment criteria. The results of the work identification process are reported along with average numbers that indicate the characteristics of certain classics. The necessity of manual identification was justified through an evaluation of searches by author and/or title information in a conventional retrieval system.
-
Taniguchi, S.: ¬A system for supporting evidence recording in bibliographic records (2006)
0.00
2.3255666E-4 = product of:
0.0034883497 = sum of:
0.0034883497 = product of:
0.0069766995 = sum of:
0.0069766995 = weight(_text_:information in 282) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0069766995 = score(doc=282,freq=4.0), product of:
0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.028978055 = queryNorm
0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 282, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=282)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
- Abstract
- Recording evidence for data values, in addition to the values themselves, in bibliographic records and descriptive metadata has been proposed in a previous study. Recorded evidence indicates why and how data values are recorded for elements. As a continuation of that study, this article first proposes a scenario in which a cataloger and a system interact with each other in recording evidence in bibliographic records for books, with the aim of minimizing costs and effort in recording evidence. Second, it reports on prototype system development in accordance with the scenario. The system (1) searches a string, corresponding to the data value entered by a cataloger or extracted from the Machine Readable Cataloging (MARC) record, within the scanned and optical character recognition (OCR)-converted title page and verso of the title page of an item being cataloged; (2) identifies the place where the string appears within the source of information; (3) identifies the procedure being used to form the value entered or recorded; and finally (4) displays the place and procedure identified for the data value as its candidate evidence. Third, this study reports on an experiment conducted to examine the system's performance. The results of the experiment show the usefulness of the system and the validity of the proposed scenario.
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(2006) no.9, S.1249-1262
-
Taniguchi, S.: ¬A system for supporting evidence recording in bibliographic records : Part II: what Is valuable evidence for catalogers? (2007)
0.00
2.3255666E-4 = product of:
0.0034883497 = sum of:
0.0034883497 = product of:
0.0069766995 = sum of:
0.0069766995 = weight(_text_:information in 325) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0069766995 = score(doc=325,freq=4.0), product of:
0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.028978055 = queryNorm
0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 325, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=325)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
- Abstract
- Recording evidence for data element values, in addition to the values themselves, in bibliographic records and descriptive metadata is likely to be useful for improving the expressivity and reliability of such records and metadata. Recorded evidence indicates why and how data values are recorded for elements. This article is Part II of a study to explore a way of assisting catalogers in recording evidence in bibliographic records, with the aim of minimizing the costs and effort of doing so. This article begins with a scenario for utilizing recorded evidence to which a cataloger refers for information and understanding of the ways that have been adopted to record data value(s) in a given element. In line with that scenario, the proper content of evidence to be recorded Is first discussed. Second, the functionality of the system developed in Part I is extended and refined to make the system more useful and effective in recording such evidence. Third, the system's performance is experimentally examined, the results of which show its usefulness. And fourth, another system is developed for catalogers to retrieve and display recorded evidence together with bibliographic records in a flexible way.
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 58(2007) no.6, S.823-841
-
Taniguchi, S.: Event-aware FRBR and FRAD models : are they useful? (2013)
0.00
2.3255666E-4 = product of:
0.0034883497 = sum of:
0.0034883497 = product of:
0.0069766995 = sum of:
0.0069766995 = weight(_text_:information in 1760) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0069766995 = score(doc=1760,freq=4.0), product of:
0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.028978055 = queryNorm
0.13714671 = fieldWeight in 1760, product of:
2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
4.0 = termFreq=4.0
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1760)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
- Abstract
- Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to present functional requirements for bibliographic records (FRBR)-based model and functional requirements for authority data (FRAD)-based model; both of which incorporate an event concept that transforms FRBR and FRAD with minimal modification. Design/methodology/approach - Relationships between the entities defined in FRBR/FRAD are transformed into event entities and relationships with other kinds of entities. The cardinality of those relationships is also examined. In addition, a comparison of the proposed FRBR-based model with the object-oriented FRBR (FRBROO) is conducted. Findings - In the proposed event-aware FRBR model, an event and its output resource are dependent on each other and necessary information about an event can be expressed with information about its output resource, and vice versa. Therefore, the usefulness and expressiveness of the proposed model is limited. In the FRBROO model, dependency between an event and its output resource is not observed, except in a few cases, since a different resource and event modeling was adopted there. The event-aware FRAD model proposed is useful - but also the scope of its usefulness limited since dependency between an event and its input/output resource is not observed on some event entities. Originality/value - The proposed models are meaningful in terms of understanding the basic structure and features of a model that incorporates an event concept. The usefulness and limitation of event modeling have been clarified through such model building. The proposed models provide a stable basis for examining FRBR/FRAD further.
-
Taniguchi, S.: ¬A system for analyzing cataloguing rules : a feasibility study (1996)
0.00
1.6444239E-4 = product of:
0.0024666358 = sum of:
0.0024666358 = product of:
0.0049332716 = sum of:
0.0049332716 = weight(_text_:information in 4198) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0049332716 = score(doc=4198,freq=2.0), product of:
0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.028978055 = queryNorm
0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 4198, 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=4198)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 47(1996) no.5, S.338-356
-
Taniguchi, S.: Design of cataloging rules using conceptual modeling of cataloging process (2004)
0.00
1.6444239E-4 = product of:
0.0024666358 = sum of:
0.0024666358 = product of:
0.0049332716 = sum of:
0.0049332716 = weight(_text_:information in 2264) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
0.0049332716 = score(doc=2264,freq=2.0), product of:
0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
0.028978055 = queryNorm
0.09697737 = fieldWeight in 2264, 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=2264)
0.5 = coord(1/2)
0.06666667 = coord(1/15)
- Source
- Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 55(2004) no.6, S.496-512
